See Attachment

The Need for Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) and Their Impact on Research Studies

     Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) play a vital role in the modern research landscape, particularly in healthcare settings where studies involve human participants. These ethics committees serve as essential gatekeepers, ensuring that research maintains high ethical standards while protecting participants from potential harm. My clinical experience working alongside nurse researchers has shown me firsthand how crucial these oversight bodies are to maintaining public trust in the research enterprise. The primary function of IRBs stems from historical ethical failures in research. The infamous Tuskegee Syphilis Study, where researchers withheld treatment from African American men with syphilis without their knowledge, and the horrific Nazi medical experiments during World War II demonstrated the dire consequences of unchecked research. These events led to the development of ethical frameworks like the Nuremberg Code and the Declaration of Helsinki, which eventually evolved into our current IRB system ‌(Barrow et al., 2022). Today, IRBs ensure that researchers obtain proper informed consent, maintain participant privacy, minimize risks, and equitably distribute research benefits.

      IRBs can significantly impact research studies in various ways. One example involves modifying participant recruitment methods. In a study by White et al. (2021), researchers examining pregnancy and birth experiences initially proposed recruiting vulnerable postpartum women through direct solicitation in hospital settings. The IRB identified potential constraint issues and required revisions to the recruitment protocol, mandating that initial contact occur through healthcare providers who had no stake in the research. This modification protected vulnerable participants from feeling pressured to participate but extended the recruitment timeline by several months. Another example of IRB impact relates to risk mitigation strategies. Stokes et al. (2017) conducted a study examining trauma-informed nursing interventions for patients with severe mental illness. The original protocol included detailed questioning about traumatic experiences without adequate psychological support mechanisms. The IRB required substantial revisions, including the addition of on-site mental health professionals during interviews, development of distress protocols, and follow-up mental health resources. While these changes enhanced participant protection, they increased study costs and necessitated additional personnel training.

     IRBs can also shape data collection procedures to protect participant privacy. In my own clinical setting, I observed a nursing quality improvement project examining medication errors that initially proposed collecting identifiable information about staff members involved in errors. The IRB required removing all staff data and implementing stronger data security measures to prevent potential professional repercussions for staff. This modification protected participants but limited some analytical opportunities regarding individual-level factors contributing to errors. The structure and function of IRBs continue to evolve alongside emerging research methodologies and technologies. Modern IRBs must navigate complex issues like genetic data privacy, social media-based recruitment, and international collaborative research (Somia Abdul Same’e & Antony Sheela Anmary, 2024). While sometimes perceived as administrative hurdles, IRBs ultimately strengthen research quality and protect both participants and researchers by ensuring ethical compliance.

References

Barrow, J. M., Khandhar, P. B., & Brannan, G. D. (2022). Research Ethics. National Library of Medicine; StatPearls Publishing. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK459281/

Somia Abdul Same’e, & Antony Sheela Anmary. (2024). Navigating the Ethical Complexities. Advances in Information Quality and Management, 139–158. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-8526-2.ch009

Stokes, Y., Jacob, J.-D., Gifford, W., Squires, J., & Vandyk, A. (2017). Exploring nurses’ knowledge and experiences related to trauma-informed care. Global Qualitative Nursing Research, 4(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/2333393617734510

‌

White, A., Grady, C., Little, M., Sullivan, K., Clark, K., Ngwu, M., & Lyerly, A. D. (2021). IRB Decision‐Making about Minimal Risk Research with Pregnant Participants. Ethics & Human Research, 43(5), 2–17. https://doi.org/10.1002/eahr.500100

• Did you face any challenges, any success? If so, what were they?
• Describe the assessment of a patient, detailing the signs and symptoms (S&S), assessment, plan of care, and at least 3 possible differential diagnosis with rationales.
• Mention the health promotion intervention for this patient.
• What did you learn from this week’s clinical experience that can beneficial for you as an advanced practice nurse?
• Support your plan of care with the current peer-reviewed research guideline.

Explain why and how you could use the study results in your practice to make a difference in client outcomes. If you cannot use the results, why not?

TOPIC: HYPERTENSION

YOU MUST COMPLETE EACH SECTION ON THE TEMPLATE WITH ENTIRE SENTENCES

CANT BE MISSED ANY SECTION PLEASE

REFERENCE NO OLDER THAN 5 YEARS ACCEPTED

DUE DATE MARCH 23,2025

DO YOUR BEST TO ASSIGN MORE LIKE THIS ONE

NO MORE THAN 10 % OF PLAGIARISM OR STUDENT PAPER ACCEPTED, WILL BE SUBMITTED BY TURNIN IN