The Research Approval Process
One of the guidelines of the Institutional Review Board (IRB) pertains research expounds about red flags of research that require Research Ethics Consultation. This guideline can affect the research process and the research approval process mainly because if a researcher wants to conduct research and collect data about sensitive topics or vulnerable population he/she is required to obtain ethics guidance that should be incorporated into research planning.
Examples of vulnerable populations that have been stipulated by the Institutional Review Board include the following; minors, that is individuals who are below 17 years, prisoners, mentally impaired or disabled persons, and undocumented immigrants, residents in nursing homes, patients of the research or adult students of the researcher (Chew-Graham, 2016).
Vulnerable populations can affect the research population because one should evaluate the degree to which it is appropriate to include the vulnerable populations in the research or if it is necessary to carry out research using information from individuals who do not have decision-making capacity such as the mentally disabled individuals as required by the research approval process guidelines.
Information from some of these individuals should also not be disclosed to the public; this, therefore, poses a challenge to the researcher when it comes to the presentation of the research findings. Chew-Graham (2016) reports that when dealing with vulnerable groups, it is advisable for one to consider any possible adverse impact that inclusion of the participants such as minors may have in later stages.
The Walden IRB also offers direction on the use of Archival researchers (Beyer et al., 2016). Mostly private or public records are used to provide IRB approval before data is analyzed. The IRB protects the data of the stakeholders. Therefore, when doing research one will ensure that he/she does not use an organization’s data without permission. If so, then the report should indicate the source of the data to avoid plagiarism issues with can prompt stakeholders to press charges against the researcher.
Beyer, T., Tiehen, J., Mahato, M., Ferrari, L., & Ramakrishnan, S. (2014). Institutional Review Board.
Chew-Graham, C. A. (2016). Reaching vulnerable groups. Health Expectations, 19(1), 3-4.
Want help to write your Essay or Assignments? Click here