An Institutional Review Board (IRB) and a Research Ethics Committee (REC) are two different types of bodies that are responsible for ensuring that research involving human subjects is conducted in an ethical and responsible manner. While the terms are often used interchangeably, there are some differences between an IRB and a REC.
In the United States, an IRB is a committee that is established by an institution, such as a university or hospital, to review and approve research protocols that involve human subjects. The IRB is responsible for ensuring that the study is designed and conducted in an ethical manner, that the risks to participants are minimized, and that the potential benefits of the study outweigh any potential harms. The IRB also monitors ongoing studies to ensure that they continue to meet ethical and safety standards.
In other countries, such as the United Kingdom, a Research Ethics Committee (REC) may have a similar role to an IRB. RECs are independent committees that review research proposals to ensure that they meet ethical and legal requirements, and that they are designed in a way that respects the rights and welfare of human participants. RECs may also provide ongoing monitoring and review of ongoing studies.
While there are some differences in the way that IRBs and RECs are structured and operate, their overall purpose is the same: to ensure that research involving human subjects is conducted in an ethical and responsible manner. Both IRBs and RECs may require researchers to submit detailed study protocols and obtain informed consent from study participants, and both may monitor ongoing studies to ensure that they continue to meet ethical and safety standards.
Share this story...
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Is ICH GCP Applicable to Non-Interventional Studies?
RWE 101 - Is ICH GCP Applicable to Non-Interventional Studies? No, the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH) Good Clinical Practice (GCP) guidelines are not applicable to non-interventional studies [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Ethical Principles and Safeguards for Medical AI in the Context of Real World Evidence
RWE 101 - Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 - Ethical Principles and Safeguards for Medical AI in the Context of Real World Evidence Medical AI applications hold [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – The Declaration of Helsinki
RWE 101 - The Declaration of Helsinki The Declaration of Helsinki is a set of ethical principles that govern the conduct of medical research involving human subjects. [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Ethical Foundation of RWE Research
RWE 101 - Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 - Ethical Foundation of RWE Research Real-world evidence (RWE) research, which is the study of data from real-world settings, is [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – The Impact of GDPR on RWE Research
RWE 101 - Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 - The Impact of GDPR on RWE Research The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is a regulation in EU [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – De-Identification versus Pseudo-Anonymisation
RWE 101 - Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 - De-Identification versus Pseudo-Anonymisation De-identification and pseudo-anonymization are two commonly used techniques for protecting personal information in real world [...]







