PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 2778556

Exploring the institutional review board process.

K M Nokes
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

This article presents both the content required in preparing a proposal for review by an institutional review board (IRB) and the process involved in gaining approval. The six categories of a research proposal related to protection of human subjects are described, i.e., characteristics of the groups involved; special groups; type of consent; confidentiality of data; possible risks involved; and non-beneficial research. Federal requirements for ensuring informed consent are presented. The politics involved in winning approval for a nurse principal investigator are identified.

Explore related subjects

Clinical Nursing ResearchConfidentialityHumansInformed ConsentNursing ResearchPeer ReviewResearch DesignJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

K M Nokes. 1989. Exploring the institutional review board process.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2778556/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

Factors influencing the development of evidence-based practice: a research tool.

AIM: The paper reports a study to develop and test a tool for assessing a range of factors influencing the development of evidence-based practice among clinical nurses. BACKGROUND: Achieving evidence-based practice is a goal in nursing frequently cited by the profession and in government health policy directives. Assessing factors influencing the achievement of this goal, however, is complex. Consideration needs to be given to a range of factors, including different types of evidence used to inform practice, barriers to achieving evidence-based practice, and the skills required by nurses to implement evidence-based care. METHODS: Measurement scales currently available to investigate the use of evidence in nursing practice focus on nurses' sources of knowledge and on barriers to the use of research evidence. A new, wider ranging Developing Evidence-Based Practice questionnaire was developed and tested for its measurement properties in two studies. In study 1, a sample of 598 nurses working at two hospitals in one strategic health authority in northern England was surveyed. In study 2, a slightly expanded version of the questionnaire was employed in a survey of 689 community nurses in 12 primary care organizations in two strategic health authorities, one in northern England and the other in southern England. FINDINGS: The measurement characteristics of the new questionnaire were shown to be acceptable. Ten significant, and readily interpretable, factors were seen to underlie nurses' relation to evidence-based practice. CONCLUSION: Strategies to promote evidence-based practice need to take account of the differing needs of nurses and focus on a range of sources of evidence. The Developing Evidence-Based Practice questionnaire can assist in assessing the specific 'evidencing' tendencies of any given group of nurses.

Clinical Nursing Research↗
PubMed2007

Subglottic secretion viscosity and evacuation efficiency.

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a common nosocomial pneumonia that occurs in critically ill patients and results in mortality rates as high as 71%. Subglottic secretions (SSs) are a known risk factor. Several clinical trials have shown that continuous aspiration of subglottic secretions (CASS) reduces the risk of VAP by nearly half. Optimal suction pressure levels needed to efficiently evacuate viscous SSs are unknown. The purpose of this study was to describe SSs and the effective suction pressure (20 mmHg, 30 mmHg, 40 mmHg, and 50 mmHg) needed to maximize evacuation efficiency based on SS volume (2 ml, 4 ml, and 6 ml) and viscosity (watery, thick, and gel-like). A laboratory model was designed to replicate a human trachea. Thick secretions had the highest percentage of mean recovery representative of evacuation efficiency of SSs (mean recovery of 86%). The suction pressure of 30 mmHg had the highest overall mean of secretion recovery (83%) across all viscosity types and amounts. This study demonstrated that higher viscosity secretions were easier to evacuate than lower viscosity secretions when 30-mmHg suction pressure was applied. Management of secretion viscosity may assist in secretion removal and delay VAP development. With increased understanding of the molecular structure of SSs, there is the potential that clinicians will be able to manipulate secretion viscoelastic properties to maximize evacuation efficiency of the secretions. Further research is needed to identify safe suction pressures for optimal evacuation of SSs in human subjects.

Clinical Nursing Research↗