Dataset Information

IRB reliance: An informatics approach.

ABSTRACT: Multi-site Institutional Review Board (IRB) review of clinical research projects is an important but complex and time-consuming activity that is hampered by disparate non-interoperable computer systems for management of IRB applications. This paper describes our work toward harmonizing the workflow and data model of IRB applications through the development of a software-as-a-service shared-IRB platform for five institutions in South Carolina. Several commonalities and differences were recognized across institutions and a core data model that included the data elements necessary for IRB applications across all institutions was identified. We extended and modified the system to support collaborative reviews of IRB proposals within routine workflows of participating IRBs. Overall about 80% of IRB application content was harmonized across all institutions, establishing the foundation for a streamlined cooperative review and reliance. Since going live in 2011, 49 applications that underwent cooperative reviews over a three year period were approved, with the majority involving 2 out of 5 institutions. We believe this effort will inform future work on a common IRB data model that will allow interoperability through a federated approach for sharing IRB reviews and decisions with the goal of promoting reliance across institutions in the translational research community at large.

SUBMITTER: Obeid JS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4837001 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

IRB reliance: An informatics approach.

Obeid Jihad S JS Alexander Randall W RW Gentilin Stephanie M SM White Brigette B Turley Christine B CB Brady Kathleen T KT Lenert Leslie A LA

Journal of biomedical informatics 20160128

Multi-site Institutional Review Board (IRB) review of clinical research projects is an important but complex and time-consuming activity that is hampered by disparate non-interoperable computer systems for management of IRB applications. This paper describes our work toward harmonizing the workflow and data model of IRB applications through the development of a software-as-a-service shared-IRB platform for five institutions in South Carolina. Several commonalities and differences were recognized ...[more]

PMID: 26827623

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background/aimsObtaining ethical approval from multiple institutional review boards is a long-standing challenge to multi-site clinical trials and often leads to significant delays in study activation and enrollment. As of 25 January 2018, the National Institutes of Health began requiring use of a single institutional review board for US multi-site trials. To learn more and further inform the research and regulatory communities around aspects of transitioning to single institutional review board review, this study evaluated the efficiency, resource use, and user perceptions of a nascent institutional review board reliance model (Streamlined, Multi-site, Accelerated Resources for Trials IRB Reliance).MethodsThis research was embedded within the Influenza Vaccine to Effectively Stop Cardio Thoracic Events and Decompensated Heart Failure trial-a multi-site trial of two influenza vaccine formulations. In the first year of the trial, a sample of sites agreed to use the developing Streamlined, Multi-site, Accelerated Resources for Trials IRB Reliance model and participated in its evaluation. In keeping with a least burdensome approach, short surveys were developed and obtained from each reporting entity (relying sites, non-relying site, lead site, and reviewing institutional review board). Data regarding time to institutional review board approval and site activation, costs, and user perceptions of reliant review were self-reported and collected via the survey form. Quantitative and qualitative analyses were performed, with costs analyzed as actual versus estimated due to the lack of established baseline cost data.ResultsA total of 13 sites ceded review and received institutional review board approval. Mean time to approval was substantially faster in sites that ceded review using the Streamlined, Multi-site, Accelerated Resources for Trials IRB Reliance model versus the site that did not cede review (81 vs 121 days). The mean time to approval was also faster than published averages for academic medical centers (81 vs 103 days). Time to first enrollment was faster for ceding sites versus the non-ceding site, and also faster than published averages (126 vs 149 and 169 days, respectively). Costs were higher than estimates for local institutional review board review and approval. Nearly half (47%) the stakeholders reported being very satisfied or satisfied with the reliance experience, although many noted the challenge related to institutional culture change.ConclusionImplementation of a single institutional review board represents a shift in practice and culture for many institutions. Evaluation of the reliance arrangements for this study highlights both the potential of, and challenges for, institutions as they transition to single institutional review board review. Although efficiencies were observed for study start-up, we anticipate a learning curve as institutions and research teams implement necessary process and resource changes to adapt to single institutional review board oversight. Findings may inform research teams but are, however, limited by the relatively small number of sites and lack of a control group.

Project description:BackgroundAn Informatics Consult has been proposed in which clinicians request novel evidence from large scale health data resources, tailored to the treatment of a specific patient. However, the availability of such consultations is lacking. We seek to provide an Informatics Consult for a situation where a treatment indication and contraindication coexist in the same patient, i.e., anti-coagulation use for stroke prevention in a patient with both atrial fibrillation (AF) and liver cirrhosis.MethodsWe examined four sources of evidence for the effect of warfarin on stroke risk or all-cause mortality from: (1) randomised controlled trials (RCTs), (2) meta-analysis of prior observational studies, (3) trial emulation (using population electronic health records (N = 3,854,710) and (4) genetic evidence (Mendelian randomisation). We developed prototype forms to request an Informatics Consult and return of results in electronic health record systems.ResultsWe found 0 RCT reports and 0 trials recruiting for patients with AF and cirrhosis. We found broad concordance across the three new sources of evidence we generated. Meta-analysis of prior observational studies showed that warfarin use was associated with lower stroke risk (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.71, CI 0.39-1.29). In a target trial emulation, warfarin was associated with lower all-cause mortality (HR = 0.61, CI 0.49-0.76) and ischaemic stroke (HR = 0.27, CI 0.08-0.91). Mendelian randomisation served as a drug target validation where we found that lower levels of vitamin K1 (warfarin is a vitamin K1 antagonist) are associated with lower stroke risk. A pilot survey with an independent sample of 34 clinicians revealed that 85% of clinicians found information on prognosis useful and that 79% thought that they should have access to the Informatics Consult as a service within their healthcare systems. We identified candidate steps for automation to scale evidence generation and to accelerate the return of results.ConclusionWe performed a proof-of-concept Informatics Consult for evidence generation, which may inform treatment decisions in situations where there is dearth of randomised trials. Patients are surprised to know that their clinicians are currently not able to learn in clinic from data on 'patients like me'. We identify the key challenges in offering such an Informatics Consult as a service.

Dataset Information

IRB reliance: An informatics approach.

Publications

IRB reliance: An informatics approach.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets