• Skip to main content
  • Skip to main content
Choose which site to search.
University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Logo University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences
Research and Innovation: Institutional Review Board
  • UAMS Health
  • Jobs
  • Giving
  • About
    • Compliance Statement
    • Full Board Meetings
      • Committee Rosters
    • Institutional Review Board Blogs
    • Institutional Review Board Staff
    • Join the UAMS Institutional Review Board
    • Review Fees
  • CLARA
    • Access the System
    • Request a Human Subjects Research Determination
    • Start a Study
  • Templates, Training and Tools
    • Consent for Non-English Speakers
    • Events and Deviations Tables
    • Expanded Access Programs: Compassionate Use & Emergency Use
    • Human Subject Protection Training Instructions
  • Reporting to the Institutional Review Board
  • Expanded Access
  • Institutional Review Board Policies
    • Current Institutional Review Board Policies
      • 1 Principles and Authority
      • 2 Relationships
      • 3 Committee Membership
      • 4 Institutional Review Board Operations
      • 5 Records (Retired)
      • 6 Documentation
      • 7 Procedures for Study Review
      • 8 Change in Protocol
      • 9 Institutional Review Board Decisions
      • 10 Principal Investigator Responsibilities
      • 11 Appeals and Reconsiderations (retired)
      • 12 Quality Assurances
      • 13 Confidentiality
      • 14 Recruitment Practices
      • 15 Consent
      • 16 Risk / Benefit Analysis (moved)
      • 17 Special Populations
      • 18 Drugs and Devices
      • 19 Human Genetics Guidance
      • 20 Questions, Concerns, Suggestions and Complaints
    • Institutional Review Board Policy Archives
      • 1 Principles and Authority Archive
      • 2 Relationships Archive
      • 3 Committee Membership Archive
      • 4 Institutional Review Board Operations Archive
      • 5 Records Archive
      • 6 Documentation Archive
      • 7 Procedures for Study Review Archive
      • 8 Change in Protocol Archive
      • 9 Institutional Review Board Decisions Archive
      • 10 Principal Investigator Responsibilities Archive
      • 11 Appeals and Reconsiderations Archive
      • 12 Quality Assurances Archive
      • 13 Confidentiality Archive
      • 14 Recruitment Practices Archive
      • 15 Consent Archive
      • 16 Risk / Benefit Analysis Archive
      • 17 Special Populations Archive
      • 18 Drugs and Devices Archive
      • 19 Human Genetics Guidance Archive
      • 20 Questions, Concerns, Suggestions, Complaints Archive
  • Research Resources
    • Acronyms and Resources
    • FAQs
      • CITI Program FAQs
      • CLARA FAQs
      • Does my project need IRB review?
      • Prereview and Review Process FAQs
      • Reporting FAQs
      • Submission FAQs
    • Single / Central Institutional Review Board Review
  • Human Research Protection Program Plan
  1. University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences
  2. Research and Innovation
  3. Institutional Review Board
  4. Author: Edith Paal
  5. Page 11

Edith Paal

Tracking changes — mark only the current round of changes

When you’re revising a document that has already been revised and approved at least once before, please accept any previous changes and only then start tracking the current set of revisions. Making sure the previously approved changes no longer show as “new” will help the IRB discern what, exactly, you’re changing in this round of revisions. […]

Filed Under: Institutional Review Board Members

Researching your own disease

Those attending PRIM&R’s Advancing Ethical Research conference this week were able to hear from Dr. David Fajgenbaum, a physician and also the author of Chasing My Cure. Fajgenbaum was in medical school when he first fell seriously ill, with what was eventually diagnosed as idiopathic multicentric Castleman disease. His experience, which included nearly dying five times, pushed […]

Filed Under: Institutional Review Board Members

Ethical concerns in research involving Romani people

A recent New York Times article describes ethical concerns related to research involving Roma people. Much of this research involves genetic work using blood samples and DNA collected over decades. The Roma are a group of people who lived primarily in Europe. The Romani are often marginalized in the societies in which they live. Of […]

Filed Under: Institutional Review Board Members

Revised Honest Broker policy

The Administrative Guide policy about Honest Brokers in Research, policy no. 16.1.19, has been updated to make it easier for staff to document their qualifications and training to act as an honest broker. Honest Brokers provide de-identified data and samples to investigators for the purpose of research. Rather than the application, certification, and audit processes […]

Filed Under: Institutional Review Board Members

Another new resource on the IRB’s web page

Emergency use INDs and Single Patient INDs – they’re sorta the same, but not really. Each time we get one or the other in the IRB office, we scramble for the relevant FDA guidances for a refresher on their processing. We finally wised up and created a summary table describing the two types of IND […]

Filed Under: Institutional Review Board Members

Ethical conundrums galore….

This particular story may relate more to IACUC ethics than to human research protections, but recent stories about testing a kidney grown in a genetically modified pig in a brain-dead human certainly caught our attention. Here’s one from the New York Times and another from the BBC. We’re not sure we can even articulate all […]

Filed Under: Institutional Review Board Members

New checklist for multisite studies relying on the UAMS IRB

We’ve finally accomplished a goal of ours – adding a new checklist for multisite studies relying on the UAMS IRB for oversight to the IRB’s “Single/Central IRB Review” web page. See the “checklist for UAMS investigators leading a multisite study for which the UAMS IRB is the IRB of record” link under “Resources.” This new […]

Filed Under: Institutional Review Board Members

Pros and Cons of Challenge Trials

Challenge trials – in which human volunteers are deliberately infected with pathogens that can get them sick – have a long history, according to a recent New York Times opinion piece. The article describes a British research center where volunteers were deliberately infected with coronaviruses in a quest to find a cure for the common […]

Filed Under: Institutional Review Board Members

Brazilian Zika research stirs debate about study result return to participants

Brazilian families who enrolled their children in research about Zika later had concerns about not having the research results returned to them, according to this article in the online magazine Undark. Although this article is specific to research done in Brazil, the challenge of returning study results to research participants will look familiar to researchers […]

Filed Under: Institutional Review Board Members

An argument about possible overprotection

Federal regulations include additional protection for certain so-called vulnerable populations, including pregnant women and fetuses. These restrictions run the risk of being unethical by discouraging, or disallowing, people who might benefit from research to participate in it, according to the author of a recent Washington Post opinion column. Sarah N. Cross writes that pregnant women […]

Filed Under: Institutional Review Board Members

  • «Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 9
  • Page 10
  • Page 11
  • Page 12
  • Page 13
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 72
  • Next Page»
University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences LogoUniversity of Arkansas for Medical SciencesUniversity of Arkansas for Medical Sciences
Mailing Address: 4301 West Markham Street, Little Rock, AR 72205
Phone: (501) 686-7000
  • Facebook
  • X
  • Instagram
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn
  • Pinterest
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Statement
  • Legal Notices

© 2026 University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences