论文君|NEJM.net

  • 首页
  • 论文句库
  • 交流中心
  • 我要提问
不出版就出局
Publish or Perish
  1. 首页
  2. 方法
  3. 正文

The study was not considered human research

2020年8月22日 1276点热度 0人点赞 2条评论

The study was not considered human research according to the review policy of the Research Institute at Nationwide Children’s Hospital institutional review board because all data were deidentified and publicly available.

出处:Trends in Suicide Among Youth Aged 10 to 19 Years in the United States, 1975 to 2016
JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(5):e193886. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.3886

标签: 伦理
最后更新:2020年8月22日

iRobot

有志不在年高,无志空长百岁。

点赞
下一篇 >

文章评论

  • admin

    1If your research involves the use of existing data collected from human participants (e.g., secondary datasets, existing biological samples), but there are no identifiers linking human participants to the data/samples themselves, then the activity may not require IRB review and may be considered "not human participant research".

    https://www.irb.cornell.edu/faq

    2020年8月22日
    登录以回复
  • admin

    Additionally, use of existing de-identified or publicly available datasets may not
    be considered human subject research. For more information, see the following document: Secondary Analysis of Public Use Datasets.
    https://irb.utah.edu/_pdf/IGS%20-%20Secondary%20Analysis%20of%20Public%20Use%20Datasets%20B2819.pdf

    2020年8月22日
    登录以回复
  • 您需要 登录 之后才可以评论
    最新问题
    • 投中elsevier的期刊一分钱都没付 提问人 admin
    • 投稿遇见很难受的事儿:审稿人死扣不放 提问人 admin
    • 何抵制白嫖的一点体会 提问人 admin
    • 论文被一导抢一作 提问人 admin
    • 三个共同通讯,地位怎么排? 提问人 admin
    • 稿件投递后期刊系统生成的PDF文档中图片却发生了旋转90度 提问人 admin
    • 中科院分区弃用影响因子,将替以“期刊超越指数” 提问人 admin
    • 为什么我的论文昨天刚发表学校今天就知道了 提问人 admin
    • 投稿系统只有一个unmarked manuscript选项 提问人 admin
    • 如果sci论文结果自己复现不出来咋办 提问人 admin
    最新 热点 随机
    最新 热点 随机
    We checked the robustness of our findings The aim of this study was twofold. This systematic review and meta-analysis includes previously published observational studies. This indicated there was no requirement for proceeding to a full formal ethics and data protection review by the Usher Research Ethics Group. No overall prospective analysis plan was used. Complete case analyses were used. Study approval was received from Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) of the primary research institution These findings must be interpreted in light of several limitations We excluded those with missing data for the primary exposure The data analysis had been planned in advance of the data gathering Data for the NHIS analyses were weighted using the final person weights Consistent with those of other studies, our findings show that This study is subject to certain limitations. Reductions in indoor tanning could be attributed to several factors. SUDAAN software, version 10.1 (RTI International), which accounts for weighted data and the complex sample design
    Gun Carrying SUDAAN software, version 10.1 (RTI International), which accounts for weighted data and the complex sample design This indicated there was no requirement for proceeding to a full formal ethics and data protection review by the Usher Research Ethics Group. We also performed 2 sensitivity analyses. This study was exempt from institutional review board approval Complete case analyses were used. This study has several strengths, but there is also a set of potential study limitations Data for the NHIS analyses were weighted using the final person weights These findings must be interpreted in light of several limitations Student consent was assumed with the completion of the questionnaire. No protocol approval was needed for this study Ethical approval was granted from the Ethics Committee of Stockholm. The IRB at the University of Massachusetts Medical School reviewed the protocol and exempted it from the full committee review This study is subject to certain limitations. No further ethical approval was deemed necessary.

    COPYRIGHT © 2021 nejm.net. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

    Theme Kratos Made By Seaton Jiang