Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 22, 2026

Assessing the Putative Anticryptococcal Properties of Crude and Clarified Extracts from Mollusks
Published on: December 2, 2022
Implementing Regulatory Broad Consent Under the Revised Common Rule: Clarifying Key Points and the Need for Evidence
Holly Fernandez Lynch1, Leslie E Wolf1, Mark Barnes1
1Holly Fernandez Lynch, J.D., M.Be., is the John Russell Dickson, MD Presidential Assistant Professor of Medical Ethics and Assistant Faculty Director of Online Education in the Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy at the Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania. Leslie E. Wolf, J.D., M.P.H., is Professor of Law and Distinguished University Professor at Georgia State University. She has appointments in the School of Public Health and College of Law, where she directs the Center for Law, Health & Society. Mark Barnes, J.D., LL.M., is Partner at Ropes & Gray LLP in Boston, MA, and co-chair of the Multi-Regional Clinical Trials Center of Harvard University and Brigham and Women's Hospital. He is also Visiting Lecturer at Yale Law School.
Abstract:
The revised Common Rule includes a new option for the conduct of secondary research with identifiable data and biospecimens: regulatory broad consent. Motivated by concerns regarding autonomy and trust in the research enterprise, regulators had initially proposed broad consent in a manner that would have rendered it the exclusive approach to secondary research with all biospecimens, regardless of identifiability. Based on public comments from both researchers and patients concerned that this approach would hinder important medical advances, however, regulators decided to largely preserve the status quo approach to secondary research with biospecimens and data. The Final Rule therefore allows such research to proceed without specific informed consent in a number of circumstances, but it also offers regulatory broad consent as a new, optional pathway for secondary research with identifiable data and biospecimens. In this article, we describe the parameters of regulatory broad consent under the new rule, explain why researchers and research institutions are unlikely to utilize it, outline recommendations for regulatory broad consent issued by the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Human Research Protections (SACHRP), and sketch an empirical research agenda for the sorts of questions about regulatory broad consent that remain to be answered as the research community embarks on Final Rule implementation.
Related Concept Videos
The Evidence for Evolution
Cis-regulatory Sequences
Common Ion Effect
Exceptions to the Octet Rule
Lewis Symbols and the Octet Rule
Key Elements for Plant Nutrition

