Our open meeting laws are taken very seriously, and as a result, all university meetings are open with very few exceptions (personnel matters, e.g.) It has been a source of difficulty regarding IRB meetings, because it is clearly represented in the regs that IRB members should be free to discuss protocols under consideration without fear of reprisals. Since we are a fairly small school, the PIs with protocols before the board will be known to the board members. Sometimes they are within the departments, and higher in the heirarchy.
The IRB has explored options on going into executive session during the discussion of the protocol. Without announcing three weeks ahead of time (I may be wrong on that time period) that the meeting will be closed, the IRB can only ask the PIs to voluntarily leave while the discussion and vote takes place. The discussion is summarized in the minutes (without linking comments with the name of the person) and the vote recorded. The minutes are subject to the open records act.
So far, all PIs have readily volunteered to leave while the protocol is discussed, but they are under no obligation to. IRB members have remarked that the discussion is freer and better when the PIs are not present.
As for proprietary information, we do very little industrially sponsored clinical studies. It really hasn't been an issue. However, we could legally close the meeting if requested, and if the minutes are properly marked, we can protect confidentiality. It has not been requested, so far.
Sally Eckert-Tilotta, Ph.D., Associate Director
Office of Research & Program Development
University of North Dakota
PO Box 7134
Grand Forks, ND 58202
Tel: 701-777-2049
Fax: 701-777-2504
Email: xxxxxx@mail.und.nodak.edu
>>> Rosemary Ruff <xxxxxx@MAIL.AUBURN.EDU> 07/27/00 07:54AM >>>
We are in the process of rewriting our policy and procedures manuals for
IACUC . In the past, the meetings have been closed members have had to
sign a confidentiality agreement. Our Vice-President has asked that the
meetings be open meetings except when the protocol to be reviewed contains
confidential or proprietary information. There are several published
references which support this idea, especially since many of the protocols
must now be made available under a FOIA request. However, the present
Chair and a couple of "veteran" members feel that it is inappropriate to
have open meetings. Their objections are that its much easier to conduct a
closed meeting and industrial sponsors won't fund projects if the IACUC
deliberations are open to the public, i.e., the sponsor will automatically
feel that closing the meeting while reviewing confidential/propriatary
projects isn't sufficient protection of their "industrial secrets."
I would like to know: 1) if your institution's IACUC(s) meetings are open
meetings, 2) how long they have been open, and 3) whether or not your
industrial sponsorship has decreased as a result of open meetings.
Thanks in advance for any information you can give.
Rosemary
Rosemary Ruff 307 Samford Hall
Associate Director Auburn University, AL 36849
Office of Review and Compliance Phone (334) 844-5978
Auburn University Fax (334) 844-4391
======================================================================
Instructions on how to use the RESADM-L Mailing List, including
subscription information and a web-searchable archive, are available
via our web site at http://www.hrinet.org (click on "Listserv Lists")
======================================================================
======================================================================
Instructions on how to use the RESADM-L Mailing List, including
subscription information and a web-searchable archive, are available
via our web site at http://www.hrinet.org (click on "Listserv Lists")
======================================================================
