• 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. FDA-regulated research and the Revised Common Rule

FDA-regulated research and the Revised Common Rule

While we prepare for the looming implementation of the Revised Common Rule (RCR), keep in mind that some research the UAMS IRB oversees is also subject to Food and Drug Administration (FDA) oversight. While the FDA promises to work on harmonizing its regulations to the extent possible with the RCR, we’re not holding our breath on that. (The FDA is the same agency that spent more than 30 years finalizing regulations for sunscreen labeling, remember. Just sayin’.) So, in the interim, here are some reminders about how FDA-regulated studies will be affected by the RCR implementation next week.

While the RCR is generally good news for non-FDA-regulated research, as the oversight burden is generally reduced for those studies, it’s a little more complicated for FDA-regulated projects. In a nutshell, investigators initiating FDA-regulated studies will still have to comply with FDA regulations, even when they differ from RCR requirements. The FDA has issued guidance about some of the specifics.

Notable differences between the two sets of regulations relate to:

Continuing review — The RCR allows most minimal risk studies to forgo annual review, and even greater-than-minimal-risk studies will no longer need continuing review once they’ve reached the data analysis or long term follow up-only phase. EXCEPT if they’re FDA regulated, that is, as FDA regulations will continue to require continuing review.

Informed Consent — The RCR has some new requirements for consent process and form content and presentation. While the FDA’s consent requirements remain unchanged, the FDA specifically notes the RCR requirements are “not inconsistent” with FDA requirements. That means consent processes and forms can meet the new RCR requirements while still staying on the correct side of FDA requirements. The UAMS IRB strongly encourages FDA-regulated submissions to be approved after Jan. 21, 2019, to include consent materials that meet the RCR requirements, e.g. beginning with a “concise and focused summary” of key elements integral to the decision whether or not to join a study. We have a “key elements” template available on our website for studies for investigator-initiated studies, and we encourage PIs on industry-sponsored trials to encourage sponsors to include the RCR requirements in their consent forms.

Posted by Edith Paal on January 15, 2019

Filed Under: Institutional Review Board Members

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