方法对比
并排查看您选择的方法；存在差异的行会高亮显示。
| 机构审查委员会× | 研究诚信原则× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域 | 研究伦理 | 研究伦理 |
| 方法族 | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| 起源年份≠ | 1974 | 2007 |
| 提出者≠ | U.S. Federal Requirement (National Research Act 1974); International adoption by WMA and research institutions globally | Multiple (National Academies, NIH/ORI, ESOMAR, individual discipline standards) |
| 类型≠ | Standard | Framework |
| 开创性文献≠ | U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 45, Part 46: Protection of Human Subjects. Office of the Federal Register. link ↗ | National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2017). Fostering Integrity in Research. The National Academies Press. DOI ↗ |
| 别名 | IRB, Research Ethics Committee, REC | Responsible Conduct of Research, RCR, Research Ethics Standards |
| 相关 | 4 | 4 |
| 摘要≠ | The Institutional Review Board (IRB) is the independent ethics committee established at research institutions to review and approve human subjects research, ensuring compliance with ethical principles and federal regulations. Created as a legal requirement by the U.S. National Research Act (1974) and now adopted globally, the IRB serves as the primary mechanism for protecting research subjects while enabling legitimate research to proceed. No human subjects research can begin without IRB approval. | Research integrity encompasses the ethical and professional standards that guide responsible conduct in all aspects of research—from study design and data collection through analysis, reporting, and publication. The core principles—honesty, transparency, accountability, respect, and stewardship—ensure that research is trustworthy, reproducible, and contributes legitimate knowledge. These principles are universal across disciplines and are enforced through institutional policies, professional standards, and regulatory oversight. Violations of research integrity undermine scientific credibility and can harm subjects, institutions, and public trust. |
| ScholarGate数据集 ↗ |
|
|