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 – Study Designs
RWE 101 - Study Designs Real-world evidence (RWE) studies are becoming increasingly important in healthcare decision-making. There are various study designs used to generate RWE, each with their unique [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Protocol Considerations
RWE 101 - Protocol Considerations Real-world evidence (RWE) study protocols and clinical trial protocols both outline the design and conduct of a study. However, they are distinctly different in [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – PASS Approval Requirements
RWE 101 - PASS Approval Requirements Post-authorisation safety studies (PASS) are studies conducted after a medicine has been authorized (licensed) with the goal of acquiring more data about the [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Categories of PASS
RWE 101 - Categories of PASS Real-world evidence (RWE) is the clinical evidence about the usage and potential benefits or risks of a product derived from the analysis of [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Safety Monitoring
RWE 101 - Safety Monitoring Real World Evidence (RWE) complements clinical trials and provides additional insights that are difficult to achieve in controlled environments. Here's why:[1] Sample Size and [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – How RWE is Being Used to Support the Treatment of Cancer
RWE 101 - How RWE is Being Used to Support the Treatment of Cancer Real-world evidence (RWE) enhances cancer treatment through providing more comprehensive and personalized patient data. Here [...]







