title: Ethics committee experience with emergency exception from informed consent protocols.
abstract: SINCE 1996, U.S. FEDERAL REGULATIONS allow research without informed consent to study emergency conditions, if there is currently no satisfactory treatment for the condition, no time to obtain advance consent from the patient or representative, and if there is community involvement through a public disclosure and community consultation process. REB experiences since then are unknown. We surveyed REB chairpersons at the 126 United States medical schools to quantify reviewed protocols and identify attitudes about the rule, to better understand the rule's impact on REBs. Sixty-nine surveys were returned (55%). Fifty-two respondents reviewing human research had heard of the Rule. Forty-eight percent (25/52) had reviewed such a study; 40% of those had rejected at least one. Seventy-eight percent believe the rule protects human subjects, and 88% feel prepared to implement them. REB views differed from public opinion on how best to enact notification and consultation.
authors.affiliation: Oregon Health and Science University (USA).
authors.forename: Nicole M
authors.initials: NM
authors.lastname: Deiorio
authors.forename: Katie B
authors.initials: KB
authors.lastname: McClure
authors.forename: Maria
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Nelson
authors.forename: K John
authors.initials: KJ
authors.lastname: McConnell
authors.forename: Terri A
authors.initials: TA
authors.lastname: Schmidt