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 – Ethical Imperatives (CIOMS 2023)
RWE 101 - Ethical Imperatives (CIOMS 2023) Informed decision making with patients typically relies on evidence from clinical trials that describe the likely benefits and toxicities. However, patients treated [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Ethical Imperatives
RWE 101 - Ethical Imperatives Real-world evidence (RWE) refers to the clinical evidence regarding the usage and potential benefits or risks of a product derived from analysis of real-world [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – The Importance of Intent
RWE 101 - The Importance of Intent Real-world evidence (RWE) is the clinical evidence about the usage and potential benefits or risks of a product derived from the analysis [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Inspections
RWE 101 - Inspections Real-World Evidence (RWE) can include data from sources such as electronic health records (EHRs), insurance claims and billing activities, patient registries, patient-generated data, and data [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Audits
RWE 101 - Audits A quality assurance auditor in the context of a real-world evidence (RWE) study has several responsibilities, key among them ensuring that all facets of the [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Compliance Maps
RWE 101 - Compliance Maps In the context of multi-country Real-World Evidence (RWE) studies, "Regulatory Compliance Maps" are essentially a detailed representation of the diverse regulatory requirements specific to [...]







