Advertisement

Journal of Religion and Health

, Volume 56, Issue 1, pp 21–27 | Cite as

The IRB as Research Subject

Robert L. Klitzman: The Ethics Police? The Struggle to Make Human Research Safe. New York: Oxford University Press, 2015
  • Stephen M. ModellEmail author
Book Review
  • 240 Downloads

An Inside Look at Ethics Review

The arsenal of research articles that stock professional and popular journals must first make their way through several gates before publication. The most prominent yet secretive threshold is consideration by the institutional review board (IRB) of the scientific and ethical merits of the research study. Despite limited access to the decisional process undertaken by IRBs, investigators submitting their proposals for review, and research participants impacted by them have no access to the deliberations taking place and weighing of the fates involved. This veil has been now been pierced by a book describing the diverse forms of personal reasoning and interpersonal deliberation used by review board chairs, members, and administrators, and the responsibilities they hold to scientific investigators and the public. Dr. Robert Klitzman’s book The Ethics Police? The Struggle to Make Human Research Safe (Oxford University Press, 2015) is his eighth to date and...

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The author reports no conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights

This review does not contain any studies with human participants performed by the author.

References

  1. Dostoyevsky, F. (1961). Notes from underground: White nights, the dream of a ridiculous man, and selections from the house of the dead (A. R. MacAndrew, Trans.). New York: Signet Classics.Google Scholar
  2. Gilbert, S. (2008). Trials and tribulations. Hastings Center Report, 38(2), 14–18.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Heschel, A. J. (2005). The Sabbath: Its meaning for modern man. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
  4. Kauer, S. (2013). How IRBs make decisions: Should we worry if they disagree? Journal of Medical Ethics, 39(4), 230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Klitzman, R. L. (2015). The ethics police? The struggle to make human research safe. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Modell, S. M. (2015). The healthy imagination: Ultimate reality and meaning through the lens of the medical genre of literature. In S. M. Modell (Ed.), Philosophical studies in medicine and health (pp. 110–140). Toronto, ON: URAM/University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  7. Nuland, S. B. (1995). How we die: Reflections on life’s final chapter. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  8. Skloot, R. (2011). The immortal life of Henrietta Lacks. New York: Broadway Books.Google Scholar
  9. Toulmin, S. (2003). Return to reason. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  10. United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP). (2015). Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 2015Summary. Rockville, MD: HHS-OHRP. http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/regulations/nprm-2015-summary/index.html. Accessed September 10, 2016.
  11. White, T. H. (1969). The once and future king. New York: Berkley Medallion Books.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Public Health and Community GenomicsUniversity of Michigan School of Public HealthAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations