Guidance Topics (A – Z)

back to top

Topics arranged alphabetically from A-Z related to human subjects research with respect to UNL Institutional Review Board review, approval and other activities overseen by the UNL Human Research Protection Program are described below. Each topic title will be linked to its page location. Topics may also include links to corresponding policies, guidance and/or templates.  If you are unable to find an answer to your question below, please contact the IRB at irb@unl.edu or 402-472-6965 or your IRB Coordinator.

List of Topics

118 Determination

Authorization Agreement

Child Abuse Reporting Requirements & Human Subjects Research in Nebraska

ClinicalTrials.gov Registration

Compensation/Incentives and Accounting Guidance

Cooperative Research

Deception in Research

Exempt Research Guidance and Templates

Good Clinical Practice (GCP) & training requirements

Grant Congruency Review

Human Subjects Research

IRB Guidebook

Lincoln Public Schools (LPS) Approval Processes

Multi-Site Research

Recruitment/Advertising

Report New Information, Unanticipated Problems, Non-compliance, Serious Adverse Events, etc.

Single Institutional Review Board (sIRB)

Social Media

Terms and Conditions (Outside Entities)


118 Determination

A “118 Determination,” refers to a determination by the IRB for applications or proposals lacking definite plans for involvement of human subjects per the regulatory criteria at 45 CFR 46.118. Specifically, a 118 Determination is made when certain types of applications for grants, cooperative agreements, or contracts are submitted to Federal departments or agencies with the knowledge that subjects may be involved within the period of support, but definite plans would not normally be set forth in the application or proposal.

Key Information:

  • When the UNL IRB is contacted by a PI or UNL Sponsored Programs regarding a project, the HRPP staff will conduct a grant review to determine whether or not definitive plans are set forth in the proposal for human subjects research involvement.
  • If no definitive human subjects research plans are detailed, a 118 Determination is issued in writing by the IRB/HRPP staff.

(NO human subjects work can be conducted, including recruitment, until full IRB approval has been obtained).

  • At least one year or sooner as specified by the IRB Coordinator, from the date of the 118 Determination, the PI is required to either:
    • verify that the project continues to lack immediate plans for the involvement of human subjects, their data, or their specimens; or
    • provide documentation to the applicable funding source to demonstrate that IRB approval has been obtained.
  • If it is found that definitive plans do exist in the proposal, HRPP staff, in consultation with the PI, will move forward with the typical process of IRB approval.

Other Related Term(s):

  • Grant Congruency Review
    • When a funding source is identified on an IRB project form (regardless of whether or not the funding source is Federal), UNL HRPP staff will complete a grant congruency review to ensure the proposal/grant/statement of work or other related document matches or is closely related that of the proposed IRB protocol.

UNL Human Research Protection Program (HRPP) Policies and Procedures and/or External Resources:

UNL Guidance for UNL HRPP staff grant congruency review:

Authorization Agreement

Also called a reliance agreement, this is the agreement that documents respective authorities, roles, responsibilities, and communication between an institution/organization providing the ethical review and a participating site relying on the Single-IRB (sIRB).  UNL typically only completes the Authorization Agreement for non-exempt research (i.e., Expedited or Full Board review).

Other Related Term(s):

  • Cede Review.
    • Typically the term that is used when an institution has agreed to allow review to be overseen by another IRB for non-exempt research (i.e., Expedited or Full Board review). UNL requires an Authorization Agreement in these cases.

Key Information:

  • The IRB Institutional Official, or their designee, is the only individual authorized to enter into Authorization Agreements for non-exempt research.
  • An Investigator is NOT authorized to enter into agreements on behalf of the institution or the IRB.
  • UNL holds two blanket Authorization Agreements with the University of Nebraska Medical Center and Boys Town. The agreements allow us to meet requirements both under the HHS regulations and the FDA regulations.
  • UNL is a member of SMART IRB, a reliance arrangement for investigator-initiated studies that involve other academic institutions. SMART IRB is an NIH-funded initiative that streamlines IRB reliance through a nationally-adopted reliance agreement, SOPs and tools that support single IRB review. More than 200 institutions across the United States have joined and, if you are collaborating with one of them for IRB review, we may be able to utilize this reliance arrangement for your project.

For more information about requesting that UNL enter into or utilize an existing Authorization Agreement, including SMART IRB, please see the topic Multi-Site Research.

Child Abuse Reporting Requirements & Human Subjects Research in Nebraska

ClinicalTrials.gov Registration

(https://clinicaltrials.gov/)

Some clinical trials involving human subjects require registration on a government website (clinicaltrials.gov) due to federal requirements or journal requirements. UNL is registered through ClinicalTrials.gov through Research Compliance Services as a central location for UNL investigators to complete this registration when required based on the study design or sponsor requirements. ClinicalTrials.gov is a Web-based resource that provides patients, their family members, health care professionals, researchers, and the public with easy access to information on publicly and privately supported clinical studies on a wide range of diseases and conditions (Clinicaltrials.gov Background, n.d.). Further guidance on how to complete this requirement is below.

Other Related term(s):

  • Clinical Trial (definition found at 45 CFR 46.102(b) ~ effective 01/19/2018)
    • Clinical trial means a research study in which one or more human subjects are prospectively assigned to one or more interventions (which may include placebo or other control) to evaluate the effects of the interventions on biomedical or behavioral health-related outcomes.
  • Clinical Trial (FDA definition)
    • Clinical investigation means any experiment that involves a test article and one or more human subjects and that either is subject to requirements for prior submission to the Food and Drug Administration under section 505(i) or 520(g) of the act, or is not subject to requirements for prior submission to the Food and Drug Administration under these sections of the act, but the results of which are intended to be submitted later to, or held for inspection by, the Food and Drug Administration as part of an application for a research or marketing permit. The term does not include experiments that are subject to the provisions of part 58 of this chapter, regarding nonclinical laboratory studies.
  • Clinical Trial (Clinicaltrials.gov)
    • A study in which participants are assigned to receive one or more interventions (or no intervention) so that researchers can evaluate the effects of the interventions on biomedical or health-related outcomes. The assignments are determined by the study protocol. Participants may receive diagnostic, therapeutic, or other types of interventions.
  • Clinical Trial (National Institutes of Health)
    • A research study in which one or more human subjects are prospectively assigned to one or more interventions (which may include placebo or other control) to evaluate the effects of those interventions on health-related biomedical or behavioral outcomes.
      • The term “prospectively assigned” refers to a pre-defined process (e.g., randomization) specified in an approved protocol that stipulates the assignment of research subjects (individually or in clusters) to one or more arms (e.g., intervention, placebo, or other control) of a clinical trial.
      • An intervention is defined as a manipulation of the subject or subject’s environment for the purpose of modifying one or more health-related biomedical or behavioral processes and/or endpoints. Examples include: drugs/small molecules/compounds; biologics; devices; procedures (e.g., surgical techniques); delivery systems (e.g., telemedicine, face-to-face interviews); strategies to change health-related behavior (e.g., diet, cognitive therapy, exercise, development of new habits); treatment strategies; prevention strategies; and, diagnostic strategies.
      • Health-related biomedical or behavioral outcome is defined as the pre-specified goal(s) or condition(s) that reflect the effect of one or more interventions on human subjects’ biomedical or behavioral status or quality of life. Examples include: positive or negative changes to physiological or biological parameters (e.g., improvement of lung capacity, gene expression); positive or negative changes to psychological or neurodevelopmental parameters (e.g., mood management intervention for smokers; reading comprehension and /or information retention); positive or negative changes to disease processes; positive or negative changes to health-related behaviors; and, positive or negative changes to quality of life.
  • Clinical Trial (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE))
    • The ICMJE defines a clinical trial as any research project that prospectively assigns people or a group of people to an intervention, with or without concurrent comparison or control groups, to study the cause-and-effect relationship between a health-related intervention and a health outcome. Health-related interventions are those used to modify a biomedical or health-related outcome; examples include drugs, surgical procedures, devices, behavioural treatments, educational programs, dietary interventions, quality improvement interventions, and process-of-care changes. Health outcomes are any biomedical or health-related measures obtained in patients or participants, including pharmacokinetic measures and adverse events.

Key Information:

  • All registered UNL Clinical Trials must have been approved by the UNL IRB.
  • The UNL IRB and the Research Compliance Services Director (UNL PRS Clinicaltrials.gov Administrator) are notified of the intent to register a project through the UNL IRB New project form application submission via NUgrant.
  • Form page one will specifically ask about registration of the research project as it relates to any of the definitions above.

UNL Guidance for registration of an applicable clinical trial:

The purpose of this guidance is to provide information on complying with clinicaltrials.gov registration requirements. It provides a description for UNL human subjects researchers on how to register and update information when they are involved in research or publications requiring this registration.

HOW TO GET STARTED

  1. Search clinicaltrials.gov (CT.gov) to ensure the trial is not already listed. In the case of NIH-sponsored clinical trials and many industry-sponsored trials, the study may already be registered.
  2. If the trial is not already registered, contact the UNL PRS Administrator (Research Compliance Services Director) in order to create a CT.gov account. Email your request for account creation to: irb@unl.edu and the administrator will register the person responsible for entry of the study.
  3. One you receive your login name from the PRS Administrator and your temporary password from CT.gov, begin the registration process by visiting the clinicaltrials.gov registration site:

Organization: UNebraskaLincoln
UserName: Assigned by the PRS Administrator- this information will be emailed to you
Password: User discretion after using temporary password from CT.gov for initial login

 

THE SITE WILL REQUEST THE FOLLOWING

  • Protocol identifier number: Please use the IRB project ID (available on NUgrant)
  • IRB approval number: Please use the date of IRB approval [MM/DD/YYYY]. Please note, IRB approval is not yet necessary to register your trial as the CT.gov site allows you to begin the process early and save changes before submission.
  • To complete the protocol template, begin from the “Main Menu,” page; go to “Protocol Record,” and select, “Create.” You can copy and paste information from your protocol into the data fields. A list of all the variables you will be asked to provide can be found on the CT.gov website.
  • When finished with the submission click “Complete” at the top of the page. The PRS Administrator is then notified to review, compare the information with any submitted protocol information, approve and release the submission to ClinicalTrials.gov for their review.
  •  CT.gov will assign an NCT number once the entry is complete and the information will be ready for public release.

Please note, while the PRS Administrator will check the site periodically to help ensure compliance, it is the PI’s responsibility to ensure all information is up to date and accurate for the registration and release to the public.

TERMS AND CONDITIONS

  • Only data for studies that are in conformance with applicable human subjects or ethics review regulations (or equivalent) and applicable regulations of the national (or regional) health authority (or equivalent) may be submitted.
    Please note that some journals require clinicaltrials.gov registration and follow the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) expanded definition of a clinical trial. Those who are uncertain whether their trial meets the expanded ICMJE definition should err on the side of registration if they wish to seek publication in an ICMJE journal.
  • The submitting organization, or individual designated as the Responsible Party, is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the data submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov
  • Study data must be submitted in English.
  • Multiple groups within a single entity (company, university) must share a single Protocol Registration and Results System (PRS) organization account. The Administrator account for UNL is held by the Research Compliance Services Director. Upon request, this person then has the ability to register and create a new user account for each PI. This allows the maintenance of one account along with the ability to track all studies at UNL that require registration.
  • Previous versions of study data will be available to the public, although the default view will be the most recent version.
  • Responsible Parties (PI) should update their records within 30 days of a change to any of the following:
    • Recruitment status
    • Overall recruitment status data elements
    • Completion date
    • Other changes or updates to the records, such as protocol amendments, must be made at least every 12 months.
    • It is recommended that the Record Verification Date be updated at least every 6 months for studies that are not yet completed, even if there were no changes to the record.

REGISTRATION DEADLINE

The Responsible Party (that is, the sponsor or designated PI) for an Applicable Clinical Trial must submit the required clinical trial information no later than 21 days after enrollment of the first participant.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION FAQs & ICMJE INFORMATION

https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/manage-recs/faq#after

http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishing-and-editorial-issues/clinical-trial-registration.html

When will the NCT Number for my study be assigned?

The NCT Number, also called the ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier, is assigned after the protocol information has been Released (submitted) by the Responsible Party and passed review by ClinicalTrials.gov staff. At that time an e-mail notification containing the NCT Number is sent. The record, including its NCT Number, will typically be available on ClinicalTrials.gov within 2–5 business days after it is Released.

Why can’t I find my study on ClinicalTrials.gov?

It might not have been Released (submitted) to ClinicalTrials.gov for processing. After a record has been entered into PRS (or modified) and marked as Complete, it must be Approved and Released by the Responsible Party (see Responsible Party data element on ClinicalTrials.gov).

The study might also be undergoing review. After the Responsible Party Releases (submits) information to ClinicalTrials.gov, that information undergoes a manual review to identify possible errors, deficiencies, or inconsistencies that are not detected automatically during data entry. The Responsible Party will be notified of any issues that need correction, usually within a few days after release of the protocol information. The review of results information may take longer (up to 30 days).

Can I register a study after it has started, has closed to recruitment, or has been completed?

Yes, you can register a study on ClinicalTrials.gov at any time. Please note that, in general, Section 801 of the Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act (FDAAA 801) requires Applicable Clinical Trials to be registered within 21 days of enrollment of the first participant. In addition, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and other journals require registration of clinical trials prior to enrollment of the first participant.

Does FDAAA 801 only apply to Industry-sponsored studies?

No. FDAAA 801 applies to any clinical study that meets the definition of an Applicable Clinical Trial and that was initiated after September 27, 2007, or that was initiated on or before that date and was still ongoing as of December 26, 2007. FDAAA 801 does not distinguish between types of sponsors or funding sources in establishing requirements for registration and results submission. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/manage-recs/fdaaa

The Responsible Party for a clinical trial must register the trial and submit results information. The Responsible Party is defined as:

  • The sponsor of the clinical trial or
  • The principal investigator (PI) of such clinical trial if so designated by a sponsor, grantee, contractor, or awardee, so long as the PI is responsible for conducting the trial, has access to and control over the data from the clinical trial, has the right to publish the results of the trial, and has the ability to meet all of FDAAA’s requirements for the submission of clinical trial information

For complete statutory definitions and more information on the meaning of Responsible Party and sponsor, see the Elaboration of Definitions of Responsible Party and Applicable Clinical Trial (PDF) and the Responsible Party data element on ClinicalTrials.gov.

Which trials must be registered and have results submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov?

Registration is required for trials that meet the FDAAA 801 definition of an “applicable clinical trial” and were either initiated after September 27, 2007, or initiated on or before that date and were still ongoing as of December 26, 2007. Trials that were ongoing as of September 27, 2007, and reached the Completion Date (see Primary Completion Date data element on ClinicalTrials.gov) before December 26, 2007, are excluded. Applicable Clinical Trials include the following:

  • Trials of drugs and biologics: Controlled clinical investigations, other than phase 1 clinical investigations, of drugs or biological products subject to Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulation
  • Trials of devices (see note): 1) Controlled trials with health outcomes of devices subject to FDA regulation, other than small feasibility studies, and 2) pediatric postmarket surveillance required by FDA

Applicable Clinical Trials generally include interventional studies (with one or more arms) of FDA-regulated drugs, biological products, or devices that meet one of the following conditions:

  • The trial has one or more sites in the United States
  • The trial is conducted under an FDA investigational new drug application or investigational device exemption
  • The trial involves a drug, biologic, or device that is manufactured in the United States or its territories and is exported for research

Please Note: For Applicable Clinical Trials that include a device not previously approved or cleared by FDA for any use and that need to be registered, full posting of the trial information on ClinicalTrials.gov will be delayed until after the device has been approved or cleared, as required by FDAAA 801. See the Delayed Posting data element on ClinicalTrials.gov.

The ICMJE’s clinical trial registration policy is detailed in a series of editorials (see Updates and Editorials and FAQs).

Briefly, the ICMJE requires, and recommends that all medical journal editors require, registration of clinical trials in a public trials registry at or before the time of first patient enrollment as a condition of consideration for publication. Editors requesting inclusion of their journal on the ICMJE website list of publications that follow ICMJE guidance should recognize that the listing implies enforcement by the journal of ICMJE’s trial registration policy.

The ICMJE defines a clinical trial as any research project that prospectively assigns people or a group of people to an intervention, with or without concurrent comparison or control groups, to study the cause-and-effect relationship between a health-related intervention and a health outcome. Health-related interventions are those used to modify a biomedical or health-related outcome; examples include drugs, surgical procedures, devices, behavioral treatments, educational programs, dietary interventions, quality improvement interventions, and process-of-care changes. Health outcomes are any biomedical or health-related measures obtained in patients or participants, including pharmacokinetic measures and adverse events. The ICMJE does not define the timing of first patient enrollment, but best practice dictates registration by the time of first patient consent.

How do I submit results information if the trial is terminated (that is, stopped prematurely) and no data were collected for one or more Outcome Measures?

If no participants were ever enrolled in the trial, set the Overall Recruitment Status to Withdrawn, and no further results information will need to be submitted.

For a trial that was terminated after participants were enrolled, provide any available data. If no data are available for any of the Outcome Measures, specify zero (“0”) for the Number of Participants Analyzed in each Arm/Group, and leave the data fields blank. In this case, provide an explanation in the Analysis Population Description for why zero participants were analyzed and, if appropriate, provide information in the Limitations and Caveats module. Even if data are not entered for Outcome Measures, submit the available data for the enrolled participants in the Participant Flow, Baseline Characteristics, and Adverse Events modules.

Are There Penalties If I Fail to Register or Submit Results?

FDAAA 801 establishes penalties for Responsible Parties who fail to comply with registration or results submission requirements. Penalties include civil monetary penalties and, for federally funded studies, the withholding of grant funds.

In addition, many publishers (see ICMJE Guidelines) will not allow study publications to move forward if PIs are unable to show appropriate CT.gov registration.

Other FDAAA 801 Requirements: NIH and FDA

NIH and FDA have additional certification and informed consent requirements. NIH grantees must certify compliance with FDAAA 801 in their competing applications and noncompeting continuation progress reports for any NIH grant that supports an Applicable Clinical Trial, even if the grantee is not the Responsible Party. An application/submission to FDA for a drug, biological product, or device must be accompanied by a certification indicating that the requirements of FDAAA 801 have been met. In addition, informed consent for Applicable Clinical Trials subject to FDA’s Protection of Human Subjects regulation (Title 21, Part 50) must include a specific statement about trial registration.

Compensation/Incentives and Accounting Guidance

Cooperative Research

Please see the topic Multi-Site Research.

Deception in Research

Deception means to intentionally provide misleading or false information about the research project.

Other Related Term(s):

  • Authorized Deception.
    • To inform participants prior to the study that a study will not be described accurately or that some procedures will be deceptive, provides them an opportunity to decide whether or not to participate on these terms.
  • Incomplete Disclosure.
    • To withhold information about the true purpose or nature of the research.
  • Concealment.
    • To deliberately withhold certain information from research subjects as part of the project design.

Key Information:

The UNL IRB approves research projects involving deception or concealment in accordance with 45 CFR 46. Depending on the project complexity, they can typically be approved using an expedited category or may require review by the full board:

  • Studies involving deception or concealment must meet all criteria for a waiver or alteration of informed consent. For a waiver or alteration of consent, the study must pose no more than minimal risk to subjects, and the waiver or alteration must not adversely affect subjects’ rights and welfare. The nature of the study must necessitate use of deception or concealment and, therefore, the waiver or alteration.
  • Some studies may be deemed to involve more than minimal risk and would then require review by the full board.

Examples of deception:

  • Misinforming subjects about the purpose of study (deception)
  • Withholding specific information about a study (concealment)
  • Fake or rigged instruments or procedures (deception)
  • Misleading play-acting by researchers and others (deception)
  • Informing the participant during the consent process that they will not be told the true purpose of the research. The participant must agree to this deception (authorized deception)

Exempt Research Guidance and Templates

  • Exempt Research Guidance (and Templates) – to be used when conducting research that qualifies for an Exempt category of review. This document describes the categories of review, provides guidance on processes and procedures that provide maximum flexibility and efficiency when conducting exempt research while complying with UNL policies and procedures.  This document contains recruitment and consent templates that can be used for development of an IRB application and after approval.

Good Clinical Practice (GCP) & training requirements

According to the International Council for Harmonisation, Good Clinical Practice (GCP) is an international ethical and scientific quality standard for designing, conducting, recording and reporting trials that involve the participation of human subjects.

Other Related Term(s):

  • Clinical Trial.
    • The National Institutes of Health (NIH) define a clinical trial as a research study in which one or more human subjects are prospectively assigned to one or more interventions (which may include placebo or other control) to evaluate the effects of those interventions on health-related biomedical or behavioral outcomes.

Key Information:

  • Any investigator conducting a National Institutes of Health sponsored Clinical Trial must complete GCP training as of January 01, 2017. This training is completed through the Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative (CITI).
  • Any investigator conducting a National Institutes of Health sponsored Clinical Trial must register the clinical trial on CT.gov. For more information about registering your project on CT.gov, please see the topic ClinicalTrials.gov registration
  • GCP training requirements are based on NIH Policy (NOT-OD-16-048)

Grant Congruency Review

When a funding source is identified on an IRB project form (regardless of whether or not the funding source is Federal), UNL HRPP staff will complete a grant congruency review to ensure the proposal/grant/statement of work or other related document matches or is closely related that of the proposed IRB protocol.

Key Information:

  • The congruency review between the funding proposal document and IRB protocol is completed to confirm that the information provided in the grant proposal matches or is closely related that of the proposed IRB protocol.
  • The IRB protocol must include the research questions, design, and procedures that are provided in the grant proposal, but the protocol may also include additional design and procedures that are not related to the grant.
  • HRPP staff will request revisions to the IRB application or request clarifications from the PI to better identity or clarify any discrepancies between the funding and the IRB applications, as necessary.
  • The UNL Office of Sponsored Programs holds funding awards until all IRB requirements have been satisfied. Specifically, Federal regulations at 45 CFR 46.103 require that grant applications or proposals for federally funded human subjects research be reviewed and approved by an IRB:
    • “Certification is required when the research is supported by a Federal department or agency and not otherwise waived or exempted. For such research, institutions shall certify that each proposed research study covered by the assurance and this section has been reviewed and approved by the IRB. Such certification must be submitted as prescribed by the Federal department or agency component supporting the research. Under no condition shall research covered by this section be initiated prior to receipt of the certification that the research has been reviewed and approved by the IRB.”

Once the grant congruency review has been completed and any inconsistencies addressed, the HRPP staff will document:

  • Grant congruency review date
  • IRB Coordinator who completed the congruency review
  • Sponsored Programs Project and Form ID numbers

Other Related Term(s)

  • .118 Determination
    • This is a specific regulation that could be used during a grant congruency review that allows for IRB approval when there are no definitive plans for human subjects involvement in a proposed project. See topic .118 Determination for more information.

UNL Human Research Protection Program (HRPP) Policies and Procedures and/or External Resources:

UNL Guidance for UNL HRPP staff grant congruency review:

Human Subjects Research

Human subjects research is a systematic investigation, including research development, testing, and evaluation, designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge. Research must involve a living individual about whom an investigator (whether professional or student) conducting research obtains either data through intervention or interaction with the individual, or identifiable private information.

Other Related Term(s):

  • Intervention
    • Includes both physical procedures by which data are gathered (e.g., drawing blood) and manipulations of the participant or the participant’s environment that are performed for research purposes.
  • Interaction
    • Includes communication or interpersonal contact between investigator and participant.
  • Private Identifiable Information.
    • includes information about behavior that occurs in a context in which an individual can reasonably expect that no observation or recording is taking place, and information which has been provided for specific purposes by an individual, and which the individual can reasonably expect will not be made public (e.g., medical record information).

Key Information:

  • All human subjects research conducted by UNL faculty, staff, students and/or affiliates must be reviewed and approved by the IRB prior to commencement of the research, including recruitment.

UNL Human Research Protection Program (HRPP) Policies and Procedures and/or External Resources:

UNL Guidance for research involving human subjects and the IRB review process:

IRB Guidebook

The UNL IRB Guidebook – developed to provide quick reference information related to the Institutional Review Board, the Human Research Protection Program, application submission, training requirements and much more.  To the extent this guidebook conflicts with the University of Nebraska – Lincoln Human Research Protection Program Policies and Procedures, the Policies and Procedures will prevail.

Lincoln Public Schools (LPS) Approval Processes

The University of Nebraska – Lincoln and the Lincoln Public Schools (LPS) District have a long standing relationship and commitment of working together to achieve classroom success for all students, including the use of research to learn how to increase those successes.  One important step in advancing educational research within the LPS District is to ensure all the correct approvals and permissions are obtained before any work (including access to buildings) begins.

This section will describe and provide step-by-step instructions on how the UNL Institutional Review Board and the LPS Evaluation and Assessment Office has worked together to streamline the approval process for research conducted within the District.

Key Information:

  • All projects, including class projects, must be reviewed by the LPS District through the Director of Assessment and Evaluation prior to conducting any procedures within the LPS District and/or with LPS students, staff or faculty regardless of the UNL IRB review requirement. If your project does not require UNL IRB review, which most class projects do not, please contact the LPS Assessment and Evaluation office directly to inquire about the review and approval process.
  • All projects being conducted within a LPS associated program (before or after school) will require review and approval by the LPS District through the Director of Assessment and Evaluation.
  • Projects which are requesting to recruit directly through LPS require approval by the LPS District through the Director of Assessment and Evaluation.
  • Research, including recruitment, cannot begin until the fourth week of school.
  • No new research, including recruitment only protocols, can start during the fourth quarter.
    • Ongoing research should try to avoid new data collection during the fourth quarter. Please review the LPS calendar for specific dates.
  • All research projects that require UNL IRB review and LPS District review are reviewed through NUgrant.
  • A background check may be required

UNL and LPS Guidance for research requiring both UNL IRB and LPS District review:

  • UNL/LPS Research Review and Approval Steps – This guidance describes the steps all UNL researchers must take in order to receive approval through the UNL IRB and LPS District if your project involves human subjects. Please read this guidance document carefully as there is important information regarding dates, submission requirements and miscellaneous personnel requirements including background check requirements and building access.
  • Lincoln Public Schools Guidelines for conducting research within LPS – this guidance describes requirements overseen by Lincoln Public Schools to conduct research within the District.

Multi-Site Research

Multi-Site Research is defined by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) as research or a study that uses the same protocol to conduct non-exempt human subjects research at more than one site.

More specifically, Public Responsibility in Research & Medicine (PRIM&R) defines multi-site or center research as research conducted at multiple, varied sites by one or more investigators. Multi-site or multi-center studies use the same overall research plan that outlines the procedures for conduct of the study, as well as the collection and storage of study materials.  An overall study principal investigator is typically designated to oversee the study at each site. The primary site typically provides materials (e.g. protocol, consent form, investigator’s brochure, etc.) to participating sites.

Other Related Term(s):

  • Cooperative Research.
    • Health & Human Services regulations at 45 CFR 46.114 use the term Cooperative Research to describe and define requirements for multi-site research specific to Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval.
  • Multi-Center Trial.
    • The International Council for Harmonisation – Good Clinical Practice guidelines describe multi-center research as a clinical trial conducted according to a single protocol but at more than one site, and, therefore, carried out by more than one investigator.
  • Authorization Agreement.
    • Also called a reliance agreement, this is the agreement that documents respective authorities, roles, responsibilities, and communication between an institution/organization providing the ethical review and a participating site relying on the Single-IRB (sIRB). UNL typically only completes the Authorization Agreement for non-exempt research (i.e., Expedited or Full Board review).
  • Deferral
    • Typically the term that is used when an institution has agreed to “defer” review to another IRB when a project has qualified for Exempt review. This does not require an Authorization Agreement.
  • Participating site
    • A domestic entity that will rely on the sIRB to carry out the site’s initial and continuing IRB review of human subjects research for the multi-site study.
  • Single IRB (sIRB)
    • The sIRB of record that has been selected to carry out the IRB review requirements at 45 CFR Part 46 for participating sites of the multi-site study.

Key Information:

  • Beginning January 28, 2018, the NIH will require a sIRB of record to be identified for all multi-site studies funded by or supported by the NIH. Please be aware, sIRB of record requirements will also become effective for all multi-site research under the Common Rule beginning January 19, 2020.
  • Multi-site research involves more than one site and all participating sites follow the same protocol.
  • International participating sites are not required to comply with sIRB requirements even after the dates identified above. Typically local ethics committee review is completed to ensure local customs and norms are addressed.
  • The IRB Institutional Official, or their designee, is the only individual authorized to enter into Authorization Agreements for non-exempt research on behalf of UNL.
  • An Investigator is NOT authorized to enter into agreements or commit Human Research Protection Program (HRPP) resources on behalf of the institution or the IRB.
  • Typically the lead institution or Prime Awardee in a multi-site research project is also the lead IRB, or sIRB-of-record.
  • Request to cede or defer review to another institution should be submitted via NUgrant through a New Project Form. All approved documents, including the final IRB approval letter must be provided to the UNL IRB.
  • UNL holds multiple blanket Authorization Agreements with the University of Nebraska Medical Center and Boys Town. The agreements allow us to meet requirements both under the HHS regulations and the FDA regulations.
  • UNL is a member of SMART IRB, a reliance arrangement for investigator-initiated studies that involve other academic institutions. SMART IRB is an NIH-funded initiative that streamlines IRB reliance through a nationally-adopted reliance agreement, SOPs and tools that support single IRB review. More than 200 institutions across the United States have joined and, if you are collaborating with one of them for IRB review, we may be able to utilize this reliance arrangement for your project. Click the link below to see if your collaborator is at an institution that is also a SMART IRB member institution.

UNL Human Research Protection Program (HRPP) Policies and Procedures and/or External Resources:

UNL Guidance related to decision-making and participation in multi-site research with respect to UNL IRB as either the Reviewing or Relying IRB:

The following flowchart represents the most common process during the course of deciding which institution is designated as a Reviewing or Relying IRB. Many other factors could change the outcome of this decision such as complexity of the project, IRB expertise needed to complete the review, number of collaborating sites, etc. Always be sure to discuss any multi-site projects with the IRB prior to agreement of IRB deferral as the Relying or Review IRB. Only the Institutional Official has the authority to enter into reliance agreements on behalf of the institution.

In addition, UNL and UNMC and UNL and Boys Town have standing master agreements to fluidly cede review to the respective institutions without having to sign study specific agreements. Decisions to cede review or to become a reviewing IRB is made on a case-by-case basis. The following “Standard Operating Procedure” has been established between entities to ensure both organizations have all required documents for records purposes regardless of whether UNL or UNMC/Boys Town is the Reviewing or Relying IRB. This description does not imply, nor should be construed that Boys Town and UNMC have a master agreement between their organizations.

The following steps must be completed to ensure the respective IRB has all the documents needed. 

  • Submit all required IRB application materials to the Reviewing IRB via the appropriate system.
    1. UNL submissions must be completed through the NUgrant system at https://nugrant.unl.edu.
      1. If UNL is the reviewing institution, all research team members affiliated with the respective institution must complete affiliation with UNL in order for them to be “searchable” via NUgrant. Affiliation should be completed through your department, but can also be completed through the Office of Research, if applicable.
    2. Submissions by Boys Town’s Youth Care division must be submitted to the Youth Care IRB.
    3. Submissions by Boys Town’s Health Care division must be submitted to the BTNRH IRB.
    4. UNMC submissions must be completed through the UNMC Research Support System (RSS) at https://net.unmc.edu/rss.
  • Please notify the relying IRB staff (at the contact information above) regarding your intent to use this agreement at the earliest possibility.
  • Once you have received approval through the Reviewing IRB, copies of all research application materials, including the approved protocol, consent document and any relevant supporting documents must be submitted to the relying IRB for acceptance. As a reminder, the relying IRB still reserves the right to conduct its own review upon receipt of approved study materials.
    1. If UNL is the relying IRB, a new project application must be submitted; however, the new project application can be completed by completing form page 1, answering all yes/no responses and then filling out the rest of the application’s open text boxes with use of the phrase “see attached.”
    2. If UNL is the relying IRB, only the UNL affiliated persons need be listed on the protocol “shell” application.
  • An acceptance letter citing this agreement will be provided by the relying IRB.
  • You may only conduct your research if all other required approvals have been obtained. This could include radiation safety, bio-safety, conflict of interest, for example.

Recruitment/Advertising

Advertising can be a critical component of recruiting for any human subjects research project. Forms of recruitment can take on many modes and vary greatly depending on the specific project or goals of the research. Recruitment could be completed through flyers in the student union or departmental bulletin boards, newspaper, radio or television ads, direct mailings, email announcements, website postings, press releases, social media postings, brochures, postcards and verbal scripts, to name a few.

Key Information:

  • Per human subjects regulatory requirements at 45 CFR 46, the UNL IRB is required to review and approve advertisements prior to use in order to ensure the protection of human subjects, equitable selection of subjects, and ensure the advertisements are free from coercive information or language.
  • “Do’s” when using advertisements
    • Spell out acronyms
    • Consider readability for communicating with the public.
    • Make updates to keep information current.
    • Provide balanced information.
    • Provide accurate information in alignment with the approved protocol.
  • “Don’ts” when using advertisements
    • Use coercive or overly inductive content (threatening scenarios, glowing testimonies, overly positive or negative photos/images).
    • Overemphasize payment (use larger/bolder font to call out remuneration amount).
    • Use font or script that is difficult to read.
    • Post or utilize the advertisement without IRB approval (most will be stamped after approval).
    • Use endorsements from other entities outside the NU system.

UNL Human Research Protection Program (HRPP) Policies and Procedures and/or External Resources:

UNL Guidance related to decision-making and participation in multi-site research with respect to UNL IRB as either the Reviewing or Relying IRB:

Report New Information, Unanticipated Problems, Non-compliance, Serious Adverse Events, etc.

  • Incident Report Form – to be used when situations arise in an active and approved project that must be reported to the IRB. Incidents that require reporting must be reported within 48 hours of awareness and should be submitted via email to your project’s IRB Coordinator.

Single Institutional Review Board (sIRB)

A sIRB is the IRB that has been selected to carry out the review requirements at 45 CFR Part 46 for participating sites of a multi-site study.

For more information about investigator participation in multi-site research with respect to IRB approval, please see the topic Multi-Site Research.

Social Media

These types of platforms allow the user to share and consume information across their (social) network and to join, create, and participate in a variety of groups or online communities. Examples of different social media sites include: Facebook, LinkedIn, Google+, Vimeo, Twitter, Digg, Flickr, Pinterest.

The following information has been developed through reference to National Institutes of Health resources on Social Media and also consultation from UNL sub-committee review of Social Media.

Key Information:

Use of social media is an important and somewhat new tool in conducting research involving human subjects (recruitment, data mining etc). However, it should be noted that use of social media in research is much different than the other tools frequently used such as printed advertisements, posters or radio/television ads. Information contained in non-social media tools are typically controlled text or in a template format that does not allow for a great deal of variation.

Social media tools, on the other hand, allow for greater manipulation and variation of context, information and how audiences or individuals are targeted to receive research information. With this in mind, the UNL IRB does not want to hinder or restrict research involving the use of social media but does require further details in the project application on the plan for use of social media in a given project.

Depending on the project parameters and how social media will be used (i.e., recruitment only vs. data collection), the PI will be asked to detail or consider some or all of the following within the IRB application:

  • Investigators are not permitted to accept “friend requests,” nor “friend” others.
  • Provide a description of the general message that will be sent to potential participants.
  • What specific information is going to be collected?
    • Demographic information?
    • Status updates?
    • Pictures?
  • How is the information going to be collected?
  • How is the information going to be used?
  • What is the usefulness of this data collection method?
    • Why is use of social media important for this research (scientific justification)?
  • What are the strategies for maintaining participant confidentiality?
    • How will third party information be handled?
    • Consider access to public profiles vs. private profiles
  • How will participant informed consent be gained?
    • Will third party participants be informed of the research?
    • If so, describe the procedures that will be followed.
  • What is the length of time that will be needed for proper data collection, (E.g. 2 weeks, 1 month, 6 months)?
  • Will minors be included in the data collection? (In the state of Nebraska, age of majority is 19 years).
  • Description of any experimental design features that will be utilized.
  • What is your typical access to this population and data?
    • Could this population and data be accessed by other methods?
    • Is there an alternate research design that wouldn’t use social media sites?
  • Is social media being used as a recruitment method?
  • Is this data being used as a secondary data set?

Other Resources:

The National Institutes of Health also provides the following questions to use as a guide when planning to use social media as a tool to conduct human subjects research:

  • Have I considered the full implications of privacy in this new and less-controlled environment? The Principal Investigator (PI) and Institutional Review Boards (IRB) should assure the procedures followed adequately protect the rights and welfare of the prospective subjects as well as the accuracy of information for decision making. Standards.
  • I need to carefully consider how my materials will be used. Although there has been a historic division between ads that are “purely informational” and “recruitment” ads, in the social media environment, this is much harder to distinguish and monitor. The outreach itself to groups or individuals with disease-specific interest may already allow for intrusion into personal privacy and result in disclosure of personal medical information not only to the PI but others.
  • Have I controlled my informational data in a locked format?

With interactive media, the location of the information is not static — (as it is in printed posters, flyers, Web sites), so it is recommended that this information be provided in a controlled, pdf or other locked format, for distribution.

  • Have I made the contact for further information site protected for the privacy of interested individuals? Any contact information (such as a Web mailbox) should bring the interested person behind a security wall for any further information exchange.
  • Do I clearly understand that the interactive nature of social media escalates the speed of interaction, allowing for greater opportunities for errors in protecting private information? Have I planned to obviate those errors?
  • Have I accounted for problems related to the portability and secure handling of information, including the encryption of all government laptops, the encryption of sensitive information during transport, including but not limited to transport across the network or on portable media, and the reporting of unintended breaches of sensitive personal information in the government’s possession?
  • Have I included my complete strategy for use of the social media and my strategies for protection of privacy and strategies for informed consent explicitly in my proposal to the IRB?
  • Have my team and I clearly understood the invasive nature of joining groups (i.e., support groups, disease groups, advocacy groups, etc.) for the purpose of recruitment?

 Other Related Term(s)

  • Terms and Conditions (Outside Entities)

Terms and Conditions (Outside Entities)

Research projects involving human subjects can often involve interactions with external entities (companies, institutions or websites) outside of the University of Nebraska (NU) system. If a proposed project is being reviewed by the IRB that could potentially violate the Terms and Conditions of an outside entity, the UNL IRB will review the request, in consultation with NU General Counsel’s Office, and determine whether or not the project can move forward as proposed. Terms and Conditions (T&C’s) is language that is included in a contract or agreement that stipulates what a user/person can and cannot do and what the entity can and cannot do.

It is not the practice of the IRB to approve projects that violate the Terms and Conditions of another entity.

Other Related Term(s):

Also referred to as Terms of Service (TOS).

 Examples:

  • The T&C’s of a University library stipulates a maximum amount of research article archives that can be downloaded by a single user. A user downloads more archives than permitted and is considered to be in breach of contract.
  • The TOS of a website stipulates fake accounts cannot be created. A user creates a fake account for research purposes and is considered to have violated the TOS of the website.