Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 31, 2026
Working with Human Tissues for Translational Cancer Research
Published on: November 26, 2015
Those Responsible for Approving Research Studies Have Poor Knowledge of Research Study Design: a Knowledge Assessment
Rahul Mhaskar1, Elizabeth Barnett Pathak1, Sarah Wieten1
1Program For Comparative Effectiveness Research, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida; 12901 Bruce B. Downs Blvd. MDC 27 Tampa, Florida 33612.
Background:
Institutional Review Board (IRB) members have a duty to protect the integrity of the research process, but little is known about their basic knowledge of clinical research study designs.
Methods:
A nationwide sample of IRB members from major US research universities completed a web-based questionnaire consisting of 11 questions focusing on basic knowledge about clinical research study designs. It included questions about randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and other observational research study designs. Potential predictors (age, gender, educational attainment, type of IRB, current IRB membership, years of IRB service, clinical research experience, and self-identification as a scientist) of incorrect answers were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression models.
Results:
148 individuals from 36 universities participated. The majority of participants, 68.9% (102/148), were holding a medical or doctoral degree. Overall, only 26.5% (39/148) of participants achieved a perfect score of 11. On the six-question subset addressing RCTs, 46.6% (69/148) had a perfect score. Most individual questions, and the summary model of overall quiz score (perfect vs. not perfect), revealed no significant predictors - indicating that knowledge deficits were not limited to specific subgroups of IRB members. For the RCT knowledge score there was one significant predictor: compared with MDs, IRB members without a doctoral degree were three times as likely to answer at least one RCT question incorrectly (Odds Ratio: 3.00, 95% CI 1.10-8.20). However, even among MD IRB members, 34.1% (14/41) did not achieve a perfect score on the six RCT questions.
Conclusions:
This first nationwide study of IRB member knowledge about clinical research study designs found significant knowledge deficits. Knowledge deficits were not limited to laypersons or community advocate members of IRBs, as previously suggested. Akin to widespread ethical training requirements for clinical researchers, IRB members should undergo systematic training on clinical research designs.
More Related Videos
07:32Use of Galvanic Skin Responses, Salivary Biomarkers, and Self-reports to Assess Undergraduate Student Performance During a Laboratory Exam Activity
Published on: February 10, 2016
06:16Involving Individuals with Developmental Language Disorder and Their Parents/Carers in Research Priority Setting
Published on: June 6, 2020
Related Concept Videos
01:56Ethics in Research
01:15Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Repeated Measures, Cross-Over, Carry-Over, and Latin Square Designs
01:15Bioavailability Study Design: Healthy Subjects Versus Patients
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
01:20Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Completely Randomized and Randomized Block Designs
01:20Study Designs in Epidemiology
Observational studies are those where the researcher does not intervene but rather observes natural variations. They include cross-sectional, cohort, and...