What is the difference between IACUC animal study proposal review in a convened meeting and “expedited” review, and when is it appropriate to use the latter?
Paragraph IV. C. 2. of the PHS Policy and Part 2, Section 2.31 (d)(2) of the USDA’s Animal Welfare Regulations require that, as a minimum, all IACUC members be given for their review a list of proposed research protocols involving the care and use of animals and that written descriptions of the projects be available to them. Any member of the IACUC may then request full review of any protocol by the full committee. In the absence of such a request, the chairperson may appropriately designate at least one qualified person to review, approve, require modifications, or request full committee review. This process, protocol review by less than the full committee in a convened meeting, is often referred to as an “expedited” review. This does not correspond, however, to the expedited review process of the Institutional Review Board applicable to Human Subjects Protection. In order to comply with the PHS Policy, no animal work may begin before the full committee has either been given the oppor
Related Questions
- New May an IACUC use designated member review (DMR) to review an animal study protocol subsequent to full committee review (FCR) when modifications are needed to secure approval?
- May an IACUC use designated member review (DMR) to review an animal study protocol subsequent to full committee review (FCR) when modifications are needed to secure approval?
- What is the difference between the three levels of IRB review (minimal, expedited, and full board)?
