research ethics board tmu

Language selection

• Français fr

Research Ethics Board: About the REB

• About the REB
• Apply for ethics review
• Continuing ethics review forms
• Policies, guidelines and resources
• Consent process

The Health Canada - PHAC REB reviews all research involving humans that is conducted under the auspices of Health Canada and PHAC to ensure that it meets the highest ethical standards, and that the greatest protection is provided to research participants.

The REB's activities and committee structure are guided by the principles of the Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans , which sets the standard for research ethics boards in Canada.

On this page

Mandate and scope, committee structure and responsibilities of members, become a member, reb mandate and reporting.

The Health Canada-PHAC REB serves as an independent ethics review board to help ensure that all proposed or ongoing research involving human participants or communities carried out by, funded by, or otherwise under the auspices of Health Canada or PHAC, meets the highest ethical standards. In so doing, it helps ensure that safeguards are implemented to provide the greatest protection to human participants and/or communities. The REB makes recommendations to Health Canada or PHAC as to whether research projects should be approved, rejected, modified, or terminated. The REB reviews applications in accordance with the considerations set forth in the Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans as the minimum standard, and other applicable policies and norms.

Health Canada's REB became operational on September 1, 2002. On April 1, 2010, the REB became a joint board for both PHAC and Health Canada. The REB reports to the Deputy Minister of Health and the President of PHAC, who jointly appoint REB members, approve REB procedures and authorize research to be initiated or terminated. The Deputy Minister and President have delegated their decisional authority functions to a senior official within Health Canada and PHAC respectively, each of whom is referred to as the Decisional Authority in Research Ethics.

Scope of REB review

The Health Canada-PHAC REB shall review all research involving human subjects in circumstances where the research is:

• Carried out by Health Canada or PHAC employees in the course of their employment;
• Carried out on Health Canada or PHAC premises, or involves technical or consultation support including the use of equipment, laboratories or other facilities belonging to HC or PHAC;
• Undertaken in a collaboration or partnership between Health Canada or PHAC and external researchers; or
• Carried out under contract with Health Canada or PHAC.

The REB may also review research that is funded by Health Canada or PHAC through grants and contributions to external researchers who do not have access to another TCPS-compliant REB.

Research involving humans as "research participants" includes research with:

• Living individuals;
• Human remains, cadavers, embryos or fetuses;
• Human biological materials such as tissues, organs, blood, plasma, serum, DNA, RNA, proteins, cells, hair, nail clippings, feces, urine, saliva and other body fluids; and
• Information from or about humans, such as information obtained through questionnaires, or from records of nonliving humans that are not in the public domain.

For the purposes of this REB, research is defined as an activity designed to test a hypothesis or answer a specific question, permit conclusions to be drawn and develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge through the use of scientific methods, standardized protocols, systematic collection or analysis of data, or other forms of inquiry. Research may rely upon quantitative methods or qualitative approaches. It also includes experimental development of new products or processes.

Examples of activities that do not meet this definition of research and therefore do not require REB review include public opinion research, public consultations, research using publicly available information, and routine public health investigations and surveillance activities. Some boundaries between research and non-research activities may be difficult to define. Whenever there is uncertainty as to whether a proposed activity requires REB review, applicants should consult the REB Secretariat or (for PHAC researchers) the PHAC Office of the Chief Science Officer (OCSO) .

The REB membership is intended to ensure that the REB has the expertise and independence essential for conducting competent research ethics reviews. The REB consists of nine regular and nine alternate members with expertise in the following areas:

• Two members with knowledge/expertise in research ethics;
• One member with knowledge/expertise in law;
• One member from Health Canada with methodological knowledge/expertise in Health Canada research;
• One member from PHAC with methodological knowledge/expertise in PHAC research;
• One member external to Health Canada and PHAC with broad methodological knowledge/expertise in both Health Canada and PHAC research;
• One member with broad expertise in public health;
• One member recruited from the community (general population) served by Health Canada and PHAC; and
• One member from the Indigenous community.

Members are appointed by the Deputy Minister of Health and the President of PHAC. The mandate for each member is for three years and is renewable. All REB member positions are voluntary and no financial remuneration is offered. However, travel, accommodation expenses, parking and other authorized REB meeting expenses are reimbursed through the REB Secretariat.

Responsibilities of REB members

The REB members review the ethical acceptability of research projects, reflecting on, for example, potential risks and benefits; respect for, and protection of, research participants; and relevance and rigour of the research. The following expectations, qualities and skills are required of all members to ensure quorum and optimal group dynamic:

• Be available and willing to commit time for board meetings (including preparation time);
• Participate actively in discussions with other REB members, providing input to research applications/protocols and input in drafting REB documents and procedures;
• Be a team player – present views and opinions clearly and directly, contribute constructively to debate and possess skills that promote working effectively together;
• Listen attentively and respectfully to other members; and
• Consider complex issues thoughtfully and objectively.

REB meeting attendance

The full REB meets monthly (except for August), either by teleconference or face-to-face in Ottawa. Quorum requires that at least five members (regular or alternate) be present, including one member knowledgeable in ethics, one member knowledgeable in law, one member from the community, and two members with expertise in relevant research disciplines, fields and methodologies covered by the REB. All regular and alternate members are invited to the two-day meeting held each June, which includes a focus on REB member training in addition to the regular research ethics review work.

All REB members (regular and alternate) are also expected to participate on a rotating basis in delegated review meetings (typically three or four per year). Delegated review meetings are held weekly by teleconference (biweekly in July and August) and consist of the Chair (or Deputy Chair) and one other REB member.

Chair and Ethics Member

Glenn G. Griener is a philosopher whose primary areas of scholarly activity are applied ethics and the philosophy of science, with a particular focus on the issues arising in health care and the ethics of biomedical research. He has conducted research into the privacy and confidentiality concerns arising from the development of electronic health records. Dr. Griener has been asked to provide advice on these issues by both the Government of Alberta and Alberta Health Services. He has also participated in or led several bodies developing national policy on research ethics.

Dr. Griener has a B.Sc. in physics (Loyola University, New Orleans) and an M.A. and Ph.D. in philosophy from the University of Western Ontario. He retired from the Department of Philosophy at the University of Alberta in 2019. During his long career at the University Dr. Griener enjoyed joint appointments with the Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, the Faculty of Nursing and the School of Public Health.

Dr. Nancy Walton is the Associate Dean, Student Affairs in the Yeates School of Graduate Studies, and an Associate Professor in the Daphne Cockwell School of Nursing, at Toronto Metropolitan University (TMU). At TMU since 2003, she has previously served as Director of the School of Nursing, as Director of eLearning, and as the Chair of the TMU Research Ethics Board. In 2016-17 she was seconded to the Ontario Ministry of Colleges and Universities as Special Advisor to the Deputy Minister. Dr. Walton also served as the Chair of the Women's College Hospital Research Ethics Board from 2016 to 2021. In 2022, Dr. Walton was appointed to the Interagency Advisory Panel on Research Ethics.

Dr. Walton has a PhD in Nursing with completion of the Collaborative Program in Bioethics from the University of Toronto (2003) and an undergraduate degree in nursing science from TMU (1992). She has published and presented on priority setting and decision-making in cardiac surgery, ethical considerations of internet-based research, research ethics board composition, and ethical and legal considerations in research on children and adolescents, and most recently on ethical issues arising in the Ebola virus disease outbreak as well as the ethical concerns and opportunities of new mobile technologies and artificial intelligence in health care. Her primary areas of research and interest are the experiences of parenting children with disabilities, the ethical considerations in the use of technologies and innovations in healthcare and moral courage.

Dr. Walton is a longstanding member with expertise in ethics on the Research Ethics Board at the Hospital for Sick Children, a founding member of the Research Ethics Board at the Ontario College of Art and Design University and remains an ad hoc member of the TMU REB. She was a previous member of the National Council on Ethics in Human Research (NCEHR) and is a member of both CAREB (Canadian Association of Research Ethics Boards) and PRIMR (Public Responsibility in Medicine and Research). In 2016, she received the CAREB Distinguished Service Award.

She is the Canadian author of the textbook Ethics and Issues in Contemporary Nursing (3 rd edition) and is the co-editor of the textbook Leading and Managing in Nursing (2019).

Dr. Stéphane P. Ahern is an Associate Professor of Medicine at the Université de Montréal in the Faculty of Medicine. He is a specialist in general internal medicine and adult critical care. Since 2007, he has served as Chair or Vice-Chair of the Research Ethics Board (REB) at Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital and now at CIUSSS de l'Est-de-l'Ile-de-Montréal - REBs operating in fields at the forefront of stem cell transplantation, psychiatry, advanced ophthalmologic therapy and oncology, among others. He was Chair of the Standing Scientific Committee on Entry on the List of Medications of the Institut national d'excellence en santé et en services sociaux (INESSS) of Quebec for several years, during which time he was interested in responsibly bringing innovation to the fields of oncology and rare diseases.

Dr. Ahern holds a Master's degree in Philosophy from the Université de Sherbrooke and a PhD in Clinical Sciences, also from the Université de Sherbrooke, where the theme of his research was assessing the capacity to consent to treatment.

Julie Toole holds a Bachelor of Arts in International Development from Trent University, a Bachelor of Health Sciences in Midwifery from Ryerson University, and a Master of Health Sciences degree in Medical Sciences, Bioethics from the University of Toronto. She has worked as a Registered Midwife in Toronto, where her practice focused largely on serving uninsured clients and the urban Indigenous community and currently works as a Quality & Risk Management Specialist at the Association of Ontario Midwives. Her particular areas of interest include management of adverse events, outbreaks and pandemics, clinical ethics, privacy, and mental health; clinical areas of interest include equity, informed choice, and prenatal genetic screening. Ms. Toole currently co-leads two ethics task forces, one focused on ethical issues related to the COVID-19 pandemic and the other on the creation of a code of ethics for midwives in Ontario. She supervises both midwifery undergraduate students and graduate students in the fields of bioethics and public health.

Me Jean-Frédéric Ménard is a professor at the Faculty of Law of Université de Sherbrooke since 2017. He teaches the civil law of persons, ethics in the life sciences and the organization of the healthcare system in the Health Law and Policy graduate programme. He is a member of the Quebec Bar since 2007. Upon graduating from McGill, Me Ménard served as a law clerk to the Honourable Justice Louise Charron of the Supreme Court of Canada. Before joining the Université de Sherbrooke Me Ménard worked as an ethicist with the Centre for Applied Ethics of the McGill University Health Centre in Montreal.

Me Ménard holds an undergraduate degree in philosophy from Université Laval (BA, 2001) and law degrees from McGill University (BCL / LLB, 2005), the University of Oxford (Mansfield College, BCL, 2012) and University College London (PhD, 2021). He is a member of GRIIS (Interdisciplinary Research Group in Health Informatics), Centre de recherche sur la régulation et le droit de la gouvernance (CrRDG; Research Centre for Regulation and Governance Rights) and VOICE: Views On Interdisciplinary Childhood Ethics.

Melanie McPhail is currently a Research Associate, Faculty of Health Sciences at Simon Fraser University, focusing on the development of, access to, and funding of expensive treatments for rare diseases. Previously, she has worked as a policy analyst for the Department of Canadian Heritage on the international affairs team and a course instructor at Western University in the Faculty of Health Sciences teaching health policy and advanced health policy.

Ms. McPhail received her Bachelor's degree from Queen's University, where she majored in geography and environmental studies, and her Juris Doctor degree from Western University. After completing her JD, Ms. McPhail completed her Masters of Laws (LLM) from Western University under the supervision of Dr. Jacob Shelley. Her master's research focused on the intersection of public health and the law, analyzing the constitutionality of advertising restrictions on recreational cannabis in Canada. Ms. McPhail is currently a PhD student in the Faculty of Law at the University of British Columbia. Her PhD research focuses on the regulation of innovative health technologies.

Mr. Charles Batrouny is currently a senior associate at the law firm Cozen O’Connor LLP. He represents clients across all Canadian provinces, and has been called to the Bar in Ontario, Alberta, British Columbia, and has a temporary call to the Quebec Bar under Rule 42.1 of the Professional Code. Mr. Batrouny is a Qualified Arbitrator (Q. Arb.) under the ADR Institute of Canada, has completed the Toronto Commercial Arbitration Society’s Gold Standard Course in Commercial Arbitration, regularly volunteers as arbitrator for the world’s largest advocacy competition (the Willem C. Vis International Commercial Arbitration Moot [Hong Kong and Vienna]), is involved in various local arbitration and ADR societies, was a teaching assistant for the ADR and Professionalism class in his law school, graduated with a distinction in ADR, and is further refining his skills as he pursues his Master of Laws (LLM) through the LLM in Dispute Resolution program with Osgoode Hall Law School.

Mr. Batrouny earned his degrees in biomedical sciences (B.Sc. Hons.), common law (J.D. with a focus on dispute resolution), and civil law (LL.L.) from the University of Ottawa. Mr. Batrouny is fluent and practices in French and English, and can converse in Arabic.

Dr. Jane Ingman Baker is a lawyer practicing in British Columbia with a national law firm that has offices in Vancouver and Toronto. She was a law clerk in the British Columbia Supreme Court and is a member of the Law Society of British Columbia. Her law practice focuses on complex litigation matters with a specialty in construction, environmental and insurance coverage matters. She has represented clients in many different parts of Canada.

Dr. Ingman Baker was trained as a biochemist, first as an undergraduate at the University of Sussex, England, and then as a post graduate student at the University of British Columbia. After completing her Ph.D., she completed two Medical Research Council Post Doctoral Fellowships in the departments of Physiology and Microbiology at UBC, before becoming a lawyer.

Dr. Ingman Baker has taught in both the Faculties of Law and Medicine at the University of British Columbia and is a member of the UBC Clinical Research Ethics Board and the Children’s and Women’s Research Ethics Board.

Health Canada Researcher

Dr. Thea Rawn is a senior research scientist and Head of the Chemical Contaminants Section of the Food Research Division, Bureau of Chemical Safety, Health Canada. Her area of specialization is method development and analysis of environmental organic contaminants in food and biological tissues. She is currently an adjunct professor at Trent University.

In addition to her work to determine dietary exposure to the chemicals of interest (e.g., polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins, polychlorinated biphenyls, halogenated flame retardants, perfluoroalkyl substances, historical pesticides), Dr. Rawn has participated in studies to determine chemical concentrations in human tissues. She participated in the early work to measure chemicals in Canadian serum as part of the Canadian Health Measures Survey (CHMS). Dr. Rawn also participated in the pan-Canadian Maternal-Infant Research on Environmental Chemicals (MIREC) study, focusing on human milk analyses. She has collaborated with researchers in other groups within Health Canada in addition to those from academia (e.g., McGill University, Université du Québec à Montréal [UQAM]) to examine the linkage between chemical exposure and biological impacts.

Dr. Rawn is currently the Head of the Canadian Delegation to the Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling under the WHO/FAO food standards programme Codex Alimentarius and has contributed to the WHO/FAO Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants (JECFA).

Dr. Rawn has a B.Sc. in Chemistry from the University of Winnipeg, an M.Sc. and Ph.D. from the University of Manitoba in Environmental Organic Chemistry.

Louis Forti obtained his Ph.D. degree in Medical Sciences (Option: Gerontology) and a Master's degree of Biomedical Science in Cell and Gene Therapy from the Free University of Brussels, Belgium. His research activities focused on investigating the effect of physical exercise on inflammation in older persons and various projects on diabetes. He is also academically trained in drug regulatory affairs (post-graduate Diploma in Drug Development and Master of Pharmaceutical Sciences from the University of Montreal).

Dr. Forti has worked as Regulatory Affairs Officer for the Natural and Non-prescription Health Products Directorate at Health Canada where he reviewed non-prescription drugs to ensure they complied with the Plain Language Labelling Regulations. The regulations improve the safe use of drugs by making drug labels and packaging easier to read and understand by Canadians. Dr. Forti currently works as a Scientific Evaluator at Health Canada's Natural and Non-prescription Health Products Directorate. He routinely conducts critical reviews of disinfectant drug submissions for efficacy and safety to support regulatory decision-making. He is author and co-author of several peer reviewed publications and a scientific contributor with the Frailty in Ageing Research group (FRIA) of the Free University of Brussels, Belgium.

Public Health Agency of Canada Researcher

Stephanie Booth is the Public Health Agency of Canada's senior research scientist on prion diseases and has a laboratory at the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg. She completed her Bachelor's degree in Microbiology at University College London, followed by a Doctorate in Biochemistry and Virology at the University of Oxford. Her primary research interests include developing innovative molecular techniques for surveillance and diagnosis of human prion diseases (Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease) and understanding the molecular mechanisms by which infectious prions kill brain cells.

Dr. Elizabeth Rolland-Harris has nearly 25 years of experience in public health and epidemiology, across multiple levels of government. She joined the Public Health Agency of Canada in 2019 where she oversaw the Guidelines and Global Health Division's Scientific Team, responsible for supporting the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. Subsequent to this, she joined the Testing Directorate in 2021 as Scientific Director.

Prior to joining the Agency, Dr. Rolland-Harris worked for the Department of National Defence where she was Co-PI and Project Lead for the Canadian Forces Cancer and Mortality Study II, which created a nearly 40-year census of Regular Force personnel to study all-cause mortality and cancer morbidity outcomes during and following military service.

Dr. Rolland-Harris' areas of expertise include public health surveillance, outbreak and pandemic response, evidence-based guideline development, health outcomes research, respiratory infectious disease epidemiology and occupational epidemiology. She holds a MSc in Epidemiology from the University of Toronto and a PhD in Infectious Disease Epidemiology from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (UK).

Researcher External to Health Canada and the Public Health Agency of Canada

Dr. John Frank has held the following major positions: Professor (now Emeritus) at the University of Toronto, at the Dalla Lana School of Public Health, since 1983; founding Director of Research at the Institute for Work & Health in Toronto from (1991-1997); and inaugural Scientific Director of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research – Institute of Population and Public Health (2000-2008). From 2008 to 2018, he was the founding Director of an Edinburgh-based Unit, funded by the Medical Research Council and the Scottish Chief Scientist Office: The Scottish Collaboration for Public Health Research and Policy. The Collaboration has sought to develop and robustly test novel public health policies and programs to equitably improve health status in Scotland, through the convening and ongoing support of researcher/research-user consortia. Dr. Frank has held a Personal Chair in Public Health Research and Policy in the Usher Institute at the University of Edinburgh, where he was also Director of Knowledge Exchange and Research Impact from 2017 to 2021, at which time he retired, and currently holds the post of Professorial Fellow.

Dr. Frank trained in Medicine and Community Medicine at the University of Toronto, in Family Medicine at McMaster University, and in Epidemiology at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

Dr. Tyler Peikes is a practicing Medical Geneticist and Healthcare Ethics Consultant at the Health Sciences Centre in Winnipeg, Manitoba. He is the director of the Clinical Ethics service for the largest tertiary hospital in the province. He has conducted research in prenatal whole genome sequencing and advanced fetal diagnostic imaging.

Dr. Peikes is a member of the Ethics, Education and Public Policy committee for the Canadian College of Medical Geneticists (CCMG) and a co-author of the Joint Statement on Involvement of Human Participants in Genetic Research, soon to be released. He also serves as the Choosing Wisely Canada (CWC) representative for CCMG and chaired a working group to publish new Medical Genetics recommendations. Dr. Peikes also enjoys teaching Medical Genetics and Ethics as an Assistant Professor at the University of Manitoba and has won several teaching awards. He also serves on several committees as ethics representative, including Differences in sex development committee, Child Health Program Tracheostomy committee, Perinatal Screening Committee and Child Health Quality Improvement team. Dr. Peikes previously served on the University of Manitoba Health REB and co-authored a report on Genetic Testing in Research including new informed consent templates and educational materials.

Dr. Peikes has a B.A. (honours) with distinction in Philosophy (Queen’s University), M.A. Bioethics & Health Policy (Loyola University, Chicago), M.D. (University of Manitoba) and HealthCare Ethics Consultant-Certified (ASBH).

Public Health Community Member

Dr. Michael Wray Clarke is an adjunct professor in the Interfaculty Program in Public Health at Western University where his teaching focusses on global health practice and research. He is a member of the Board of Directors of the Middlesex Hospital Alliance. As well, he is a member of the Editorial Board of Globalization and Health, a BioMed Central journal, and former Chief Executive Officer of the Middlesex-London Health Unit.

Dr. Clarke was the inaugural Director of the Global Health Policy Program Area at the International Development Research Centre in Ottawa where he founded the Advisory Committee on Research Ethics and served as Chair for two years. In this capacity he worked with the Secretariat on Responsible Conduct of Research to develop a CORE module on the ethics of multi-jurisdictional research.

Previously, he was a professor in the Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry where his research focussed on the molecular genetics of African trypanosomes. He also served as Chair of the University Council on Animal Care for three years and served as Chair for many site visits and assessments at university research facilities on behalf of the Canadian Council on Animal Care.

Dr. Clarke's formative years were in Sierra Leone where he served as a CUSO co-operant as a teacher and researcher. He has a PhD from the Department of Pathology of the University of Guelph.

Dr. Diane Lu is a public health physician and medical advisor in communicable diseases in the Department of National Defence. She also provides clinical care services with Correctional Services Canada. Dr. Lu has adjunct appointments to both the University of Ottawa and Queen's University working with public health and preventive medicine residents. Her current research interests include health surveillance of Canadian Armed Forces members. Dr. Lu holds both an MD and PhD degree from the University of Toronto and was a Postdoctoral Fellow at Harvard University. She also earned a Master's of Public Health from Queen's University and is a Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians of Canada.

Community Member - General Population

Ms. Janaki Jayanthan is a Senior Primary Care Program Developer (Vancouver Island) with the Primary Care Division of the British Columbia Ministry of Health. In her current role she supports the implementation of Urgent and Primary Care Centres and Community Health Centres as part of provincial efforts towards team-based primary and community care. Ms. Jayanthan's passion and appreciation for research ethics began while supporting the work of the Conjoint Faculties and Conjoint Health Research Ethics Boards at the University of Calgary over a four-year period. As a Research Ethics Advisor, she worked alongside researchers, the REB Chairs and members, and her administrator colleagues to navigate complex issues in the protection of participants in research, laying the foundation for a lasting interest in the field.

Ms. Jayanthan has contributed to public health research and community-based projects in Canada and abroad in diverse areas such as the experiences of marginalized groups in self-managing their chronic conditions in Vancouver, patient reported measures of outpatient care quality in Sri Lanka, antibiotic knowledge and use in central Mexico and household water treatment in Eastern Bolivia. Ms. Jayanthan holds a Bachelor of Arts in International Relations from the University of Calgary and a Masters of Public Health (Global Health) from Simon Fraser University.

Dr. Sandra Romain completed a direct-entry Ph.D. at the University of Toronto in Medical Anthropology in 2016, where she was the recipient of both CIHR and Ontario Graduate Scholarships. She holds a Bachelor of Science (Honours) in Medical Anthropology from the University of Toronto Scarborough.

Her community-based research in Nunavut considered how policy, Inuit culture and Indigenous language preservation legislation influence pharmacy health care. She has published and presented extensively on a variety of issues including peer-reviewed articles on Indigenous health literacy, pharmaceutical policy, immunization uptake, Arctic One Health initiatives and prenatal care. She has taught undergraduate courses at the University of Toronto and Trent University. In 2018, Dr. Romain joined Indigenous Services Canada, working with the National Indigenous Economic Development Board to advocate for the improvement of Indigenous economic development. In 2021, she accepted a temporary assignment at the Public Health Agency of Canada as the Associate Director of Vaccine Confidence Policy in COVID Vaccine Rollout.

Madzouka Kokolo is academically trained both in Epidemiology (Master of Science, University of Ottawa) and in Public Ethics (Master of Arts, Saint Paul University). She has been involved in health science projects in academic, governmental and non-profit contexts, locally, nationally, and internationally (e.g., Canadian Society for International Health, United Nations Population Fund). Her M.Sc. thesis quantitatively analyzed intersections between methods and ethics considerations in the design of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis trials, which involved populations in situations of vulnerability. Her research contributed to increasing awareness and clearing misconceptions on that (then) novel intervention in the community (e.g., collaboration with the Canadian AIDS Society).

Having previous work experience as a Methodologist (Ottawa Hospital Research Institute), Ms. Kokolo has extensive knowledge and experience in clinical research designs, research conduct and methodological assessments, and is a published author. She also worked as an Epidemiologist in Health Canada's Health Products and Food Branch, routinely conducting critical appraisals of scientific evidence to support regulatory decision-making. Ms. Kokolo is currently working as a Senior Policy Analyst in the Office of the Chief Accessibility Officer at Employment and Social Development Canada.

Community Member - Indigenous Population

Jean Levasseur-Moreau is an Innu from the community of Essipit, where he grew up. In 2017, he received his PhD in experimental medicine from Laval University. His academic research focused on the clinical, cognitive and neurobiological effects of transcranial magnetic stimulation in military personnel diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder that was resistant to usual treatments. During his studies, he obtained several awards from the Fonds de Recherche en Santé du Québec and the Tshakapesh Institute. He was also involved in the Indigenous Student Association as well as a regional representative for Indspire, an organization that provides scholarships to Indigenous students in need. Dr. Levasseur-Moreau is also a mentor on the Academos platform for the New Pathways Foundation and the Myriagone Chair, a position aimed at helping young people find their dream career.

Dr. Levasseur-Moreau has worked in the field of governance at the First Nations of Quebec and Labrador Health and Social Services Commission, where he had the privilege of visiting almost all First Nations communities in Quebec and witnessing the major issues related to health. He is currently working for the Police Ethics Commissioner of the Ministry of Public Security as an Indigenous liaison to promote access to justice for Indigenous people and to offer culturally sensitive services. Since the fall of 2020, he has also been a member of the Human Research Ethics Committee of the Université du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue.

Kathleen Makela, a member of the Fort Resolution Métis Nation in the Northwest Territories, lives in Edmonton, Alberta. A descent of Old Man Beaulieu on her mother's side, and Finnish on her father's side (he is a first-generation Canadian), she is deeply committed to improving the socio-economic conditions of Indigenous people through access to equitable, culturally relevant and responsive education and legal systems.

Ms. Makela holds a BA interdisciplinary honors degree with distinction from Saint Thomas University and a law degree from the University of New Brunswick. She is currently an Indigenous Support Officer at the University of Alberta Faculty of Law. Over the years, Ms. Makela has had the good fortune to work with many traditional knowledge keepers and she appreciates the importance of spiritual teachings and ceremonies.

The Health Canada and Public Health Agency of Canada Research Ethics Board welcomes membership applications from interested individuals at any time. If there are no openings, applications will be kept on file for future consideration.

Current Opportunities

There are no openings at this time.

Individuals who would like to apply to become an REB member should send their curriculum vitae along with a covering letter outlining their interest and how they meet the criteria to:

Dr. Gregory Huyer Manager, Health Canada-PHAC REB Secretariat [email protected] Tel : 613-941-5199

We thank all those who apply.

Only applicants chosen for an interview will be contacted.

Page details

Research Ethics Board (REB) Members’ Preparation for, and Perceived Knowledge of Research Ethics

• Published: 16 March 2016
• Volume 14 , pages 191–197, ( 2016 )

Cite this article

• Rylan Egan 1 ,
• Denise Stockley 1 ,
• Chi Yan Lam 2 ,
• Laura Kinderman 2 &
• Alexandra S. Youmans 2  

1272 Accesses

6 Citations

Explore all metrics

The Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans (TCPS) was first developed to establish a standard of practice in research ethics by the three federal agencies responsible for funding institutional research in Canada: Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC), and Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC). In 2010, a second edition of the policy, known as the TCPS 2, was released with updated information and expanded coverage of research ethics issues. According to the TCPS 2, the Agencies’ mandate is “to promote research that is conducted according to the highest ethical standards,” and the TCPS 2 serves as a benchmark for this with respect for human dignity as its underlying value. Research institutions receiving Agency funding are to comply with this policy statement by forming Research Ethics Boards (REBs) to review all research involving human participants. The intention behind this review requirement is to provide a proportionate assessment of the benefit-to-risk ratio of the research, and in that process, to safeguard “respect for persons”, express a “concern for welfare”, and uphold “justice” (CIHR, SSHRC, NSERC 2010 , p. 8). Research may not proceed until ethics approval is granted by an institution’s REB. The current study evaluates REB members’ perspectives on their knowledge of research ethics, and juxtaposes these perceptions with those of researchers. Specifically, we are interested in the extent to which REB members with less experience read the TCPS 2, and whether those with less experience have decreased confidence in their ethics knowledge.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Qualitative Research: Ethical Considerations

How to use and assess qualitative research methods

Loraine Busetto, Wolfgang Wick & Christoph Gumbinger

Focus group methodology: some ethical challenges

Julius Sim & Jackie Waterfield

Allen, G. (2008). Getting beyond form filling: the role of institutional governance in human research ethics. Journal of Academic Ethics , 6 , 105–116. doi: 10.1007/s10805-008-9057-9 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, and Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (2010). Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans.

Davey, K. G. (2009). Reflections on my experience in human research ethics. Journal of Academic Ethics , 7 , 27–31. doi: 10.1007/s10805-009-9088-x .

De Vries, R. G., & Forsberg, C. (2002). What do IRBs look like? what kind of support do they receive? Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance , 9 , 199–216. doi: 10.1080/08989620214683 .

De Vries, R. G., Anderson, M. S., & Martinson, B. C. (2006). Normal misbehaviour: scientists talk about the ethics of research. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics , 1 , 43–50.

Guillemin, M., Gillam, L., Rosenthal, D., & Bolitho, A. (2010). Resources employed by health researchers to ensure ethical research practice. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics , 5 , 21–34. doi: 10.1525/jer.2010.5.2.21 .

Guillemin, M., Gillam, L., Rosenthal, D., & Bolitho, A. (2012). Human research ethics committees: examining their roles and responsibilities. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics , 7 , 38–49. doi: 10.1525/jer.2012.7.3.38 .

Hayes, G. J., Hayes, S. C., & Dykstra, T. (1995). A survey of institutional review boards: characteristics, policies, and procedures. IRB: Ethics and Human Research , 17 , 1–6.

Jennings, S. L. M. (2010). Two models of social science research ethics review. Research Ethics Review , 6 , 86–90. doi: 10.1177/174701611000600304 .

Lidz, C. W., & Gaverich, S. (2013). What the ANPRM missed: additional needs for IRB reform. The Journal of Law, Medicine, and Ethics , 41 , 390–396. doi: 10.1111/jlme.12050 .

Lindorff, M. (2010). Ethics, ethical human research and human research ethics committees. Australian Universities Review , 52 , 51–59.

Google Scholar  

MacNeil, S. D., & Fernandez, C. V. (2006). Informing research participants of research results: analysis of Canadian university based research ethics boards. Journal of Medical Ethics , 32 , 49–54.

Martinson, B. C., Anderson, M. S., & De Vries, R. G. (2005). Scientists behaving badly. Nature , 435 , 737–738.

Tilley, S. A. (2008). A troubled dance: doing the work of research ethics review. Journal of Academic Ethics , 6 , 91–104. doi: 10.1007/s10805-008-9058-8 .

Tilley, S. A., Killins, J., & Van Oosten, D. (2005). Connections and tensions between university and school districts: research review boards and school-based researc h . Alberta Journal of Education , 51 , 1–16.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Office of Health Sciences Education, Queen’s University, 78 Barrie Street, 2nd and 3rd floor, Ontario, Kingston, K7L 3N6, USA

Rylan Egan & Denise Stockley

Queen’s University, Ontario, Kingston, Canada

Chi Yan Lam, Laura Kinderman & Alexandra S. Youmans

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rylan Egan .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors do not have any potential, perceived or real, conflicts of interest.

Grant Support

Ethics clearance for this research was granted by the General Research Ethics Board at Queen’s University.

Informed Consent

All participants were provided with information about the study, and were required to provide consent before proceeding to the survey questions.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Egan, R., Stockley, D., Lam, C.Y. et al. Research Ethics Board (REB) Members’ Preparation for, and Perceived Knowledge of Research Ethics. J Acad Ethics 14 , 191–197 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-016-9256-8

Download citation

Published : 16 March 2016

Issue Date : September 2016

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-016-9256-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Research ethics
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Research Help
• Research Checklist: Starting a Story
• Newspaper Databases
• Specific Newspapers
• Literary and Long-form Journalism
• Broadcast Journalism
• Data and Digital Journalism
• Search Across Government Sites
• Indigenous Journalism
• Top Scholarly Journals
• Ethical Reporting
• Evaluating Sources

Indigenous Journalism Writing Guides

Professional practice.

Responsible Reporting

• << Previous: Writing and Style Guides
• Next: Evaluating Sources >>
• Last Updated: Mar 25, 2024 4:54 PM
• URL: https://learn.library.torontomu.ca/journalism

TMU Archives & Special Collections

• Archival descriptions
• Authority records
• Archival institutions
• Digital objects

• Quick search

File RG 57.38 - Research Ethics Board

• Research Ethics Board

Title and statement of responsibility area

Title proper, general material designation, parallel title, other title information, title statements of responsibility, title notes, level of description, reference code, edition area, edition statement, edition statement of responsibility, class of material specific details area, statement of scale (cartographic), statement of projection (cartographic), statement of coordinates (cartographic), statement of scale (architectural), issuing jurisdiction and denomination (philatelic), dates of creation area.

• 1994-2004 (Creation)

Physical description area

Physical description, publisher's series area, title proper of publisher's series, parallel titles of publisher's series, other title information of publisher's series, statement of responsibility relating to publisher's series, numbering within publisher's series, note on publisher's series, archival description area, custodial history, scope and content.

Formerly the "Ethics Review Board". File contains: Application Form & Guidelines E-Mail messages. A decision was made to close this file off because indications suggested that the REB became the responsibility of the Associate Vice-President, Academic (Research and International Development). See Collection Record 654.01.03

Physical condition

Immediate source of acquisition, arrangement, language of material, script of material, location of originals, availability of other formats, restrictions on access.

Records under review. Contact the Archives for information on access.

Terms governing use, reproduction, and publication

Finding aids, associated materials, related materials, alternative identifier(s), standard number area, standard number, access points, subject access points, place access points, name access points, genre access points, control area, description record identifier, institution identifier, rules or conventions, level of detail, dates of creation, revision and deletion, language of description, script of description, accession area.

• Browse as list
• Browse digital objects
• Dublin Core 1.1 XML

Related subjects

Related people and organizations, related places, related genres.

Breadcrumbs

Research Ethics Boards

What do I need before I can begin?

Carefully review the information in the Ethics in Human Research section to fully understand who is eligible to conduct research at the University of Toronto (U of T) and when review of research by a U of T Research Ethics Board is required.

University of Toronto (U of T) Research Ethics Boards (REBs)

Ethics protocols are reviewed by one of the following University of Toronto (U of T) Research Ethics Boards REBs, depending on the departmental or faculty affiliation of the Principal Investigator (PI).

Health Sciences REB

Social Sciences, Humanities and Education REB

REB Contacts & Affiliations

Chair: Professor Jayne Baker Manager: Dean Sharpe Research from: Faculties of Arts and Science, Information, Music, Education (OISE/UT), and the Toronto School of Theology.  

Chair: Professor Michael Atkinson Manager: Daniel Gyewu Research from: Faculties of Medicine (all departments), Applied Science and Engineering, Nursing, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Social Work, Physical Education & Health, Dentistry, and the Dalla Lana School of Public Health.

Submission Deadlines & Important Dates

The deadline for delegated review is every Monday (or first business day of the week) by 4:00 PM. Investigators are advised to submit well in advance of their anticipated start date, recognizing that approvals must be obtained by supervisors (for student research) and the departmental chair/dean.

Full board submission deadlines and all meetings dates can be found by visiting  Protocol Submission Deadlines & Who to Submit To .

For details on the process of submitting a protocol to an REB, please see  Submit a Human Ethics Protocol.

• Coordinate, facilitate and manage REB operations

VPRI Contact

Daniel gyewu, kristina miljic (ognjanovic), dean sharpe.

Back To Top

You are invited to provide feedback about the services and support you recently received from VPRI. You need valid UTORid credentials to access the feedback form.  

• Research Ethics

QMU Research Ethics

All primary research undertaken by staff and students at QMU requires the necessary ethical approval prior to commencing any data collection.  If you have queries about research ethics at QMU please email the Secretary to the University Research Ethics Committee via the Research Ethics email address

How to apply 

All research studies conducted by staff and students at QMU requires ethical approval from the relevant QMU Divisional or University Research Ethics Committee (also known as DivREC or UREC).  Applicants are required to complete the standard research ethics application form and submit a research proposal/protocol. Depending on the type of study being undertaken, additional documentation may be required to support your application.  A checklist is included in the standard research ethics application form, and this will indicate if (and what) additional documents are required for inclusion with your submission.  

On completion of the research ethics application form and the necessary additional documentation, applications should be submitted to the appropriate committee for consideration.  Details of which committee you need to apply to

QMU Research Ethics – Application Documentation

All applicants are required to complete the following:

• Standard QMU Research Ethics Form
• Research Protocol/Proposal - ( for students, please follow advice from your supervisor/subject area with regards to the format of your research protocol/proposal)

In addition, you may be required to complete additional supplementary forms as indicated in the checklist included in the standard QMU Research Ethics Form.  Supplementary form information

If your research involves or relates to any of the following please see below for information and supporting application documentation which will be required to be submitted with your application:

• Travel Overseas
• Vulnerable Participants 
• Extremism/Terrorism 
• Use of QMU Labs or Media Equipment 
• NHS Patients, Prisoners or NHS Staff

Major Invasive Procedures

Applying for External Ethical Approval 

If ethical approval is required from an external body for your study  - for example, from NHS or another research partner - you must first submit an application and receive confirmation of ethical approval from the relevant QMU Research Ethics Committee. Following this approval, and upon receipt of confirmation of ethical approval from the necessary external body, a copy should also be provided to the relevant DivREC or UREC. Please note: any study involving NHS Patients and Staff, Prisoners or participants that lack capacity to give consent must go through the NHS (IRAS, R&D) as well as the QMU process. For more information please refer to the tabs entitled 'Research Involving Vulnerable Participants' and 'NHS Patients, Staff & Prisoners'.

Making changes to studies after ethical approval has been granted

If you need to make changes to your study after ethical approval has been granted please complete a Notification of Amendments and Changes form and submit it, along with your revised application documentation (with revisions clearly highlighted), to the Committee that originally approved the study.  

Research Involving Travel Overseas

The University has a duty of care to all who travel overseas for work and studies and needs to be assured that those travelling have fully assessed the risks and put appropriate measures into place to control the risks. The Travel Standard sets five requirements to ensure that travellers have appropriate insurance coverage and suitable support plans and supervision agreements.

The Travel Standard requires that:

• Travellers intending to travel overseas must obtain prior approval from their line manager or supervisor before making any related travel arrangements or commitments.
• A risk assessment is completed for all travel overseas and submitted for approval as part of the pre-approval process.
• Travellers create a DrumCussac account .
• Travellers download the Global Risk Manager App, available on both iOS and Android devices.
• Travellers complete the mandatory Travel Prepare e-learning modules .

If your study will be conducted overseas then an authorised travel risk assessment must be submitted with your ethical approval application.  

Additional Information

Health and Safety Guidance note

QMU Travel Cover Summary 2022

Research Relating to Extremism or Terrorism

The Counter-Terrorism & Security Act 2015 places a statutory duty on Queen Margaret University ‘to have due regard to the need to prevent people from being drawn into terrorism’. This is commonly known as ‘the Prevent duty.’ Within universities, the 'Prevent duty' refers to measures taken to safeguard members of the University community who might be at risk of being drawn into terrorism.

The possession or distribution of security-sensitive or extremism related materials by researchers can also be open to misinterpretation by law enforcement authorities, and this can put researchers at risk of arrest and prosecution under counter-terrorism legislation.

The University is developing a Security-sensitive or extremism related research policy and procedure (link to follow).

The following prompts are intended to help researchers understand whether their research may fall into the category of security-sensitive or extremism related research.

Should a researcher be unsure about whether their research could be considered security-sensitive or extremism related they should contact the Research Ethics Panel ([email protected]) who will arrange a confidential discussion with a member of the University Prevent Group.

• Could any aspect of your research relate to terrorism, extremism, terrorist or extremist organisations or groups, extremist ideologies, radicalisation or de-radicalisation?
• Could your research involve visits to websites that might be associated with terrorism, extremism, or radicalisation?
• If your research involves the observation of social media accounts, discussion fora, or similar; do you consider it likely, on the balance of probabilities, that terrorist or extremist literature may be found
• Could your research involve the download and/or storage of any materials relating to terrorism, extremism, or radicalisation?
• Could your research involve the electronic transmission of materials relating to terrorism, extremism, or radicalisation to other individuals?

Research Involving Vulnerable Participants

The following participant categories are regarded as vulnerable:

• NHS Patients *
• Expectant or new mothers
• Refugees, asylum seekers or recent migrants
• Learning disabilities
• Impaired mental capacity
• Any other condition which affect ability to connect *
• Anyone engaged in illegal activities
• Staff, service users, clients, premises or records, or datasets
• Participants in an institutional context (e.g school, healthcare or custodial settings) or organisational setting (e.g business, workplace)
• Participants in an organisation or setting in which the researcher has a past/current role or position of authority

* Please note that studies recruiting participants from these groups are also required to apply for IRAS approval following receipt of a QMU favourable ethical approval opinion .  

For further information on the required level of disclosure and whether registration on the PVG Scheme is required for your research work please see the QMU Disclosure and PVG membership guidance .  If you are/were resident in a country which is not on the UK Government list , you should also obtain a Police Check/Certificate of Good Conduct from the local police authority in the relevant country.

Major invasive procedures are those where some participants are likely to find participation stressful, disturbing, or psychologically or socially harmful, and probable harm could be protracted or severe. That only a small minority of participants may respond in this manner does not render the procedure minor invasive. In addition, this also includes invasive techniques (e.g. taking blood, surgery, etc). Please email [email protected] if you are not sure if your research is major invasive for advice.

NHS Patients, Staff or Prisoners

Research involving NHS patients or prisoners.

For further information and to apply for NHS Research Ethics, R&D approval please follow this link to the IRAS website. Integrated Research Application System (myresearchproject.org.uk)

Research involving NHS Staff.

Research involving NHS staff does not require NHS ethics approval but does require NHS R&D approval. The R&D approval is done by completing the IRAS for. For further information and to apply for NHS R&D approval please follow this link to the IRAS website Integrated Research Application System (myresearchproject.org.uk)

Useful Information 

IRAS Help - Using IRAS - New Users (myresearchproject.org.uk) Research Ethics Service and Research Ethics Committees - Health Research Authority (hra.nhs.uk)

Informing participants and seeking consent - Health Research Authority (hra.nhs.uk)

Research with potentially vulnerable people – UKRI

Principles of consent - Consent and Participant information sheet preparation guidance. (hra-decisiontools.org.uk)

Use of QMU Labs/Media Equipment

Use of QMU Science labs

If you require any resources for your research project, you must complete the labs form. Please consider the techniques you may be using, any equipment, consumables, and protective equipment to support this. If you require technical support to support demonstration of any novel techniques, you must also factor this is. 

If you are unsure of the cost of any of your requirements or if the equipment/specialised rooms required are available, please contact a member of the technical team at: [email protected]

To complete the QMU labs form please follow this link.

Use of media equipment

Media Services provides a range of audio-visual equipment and services to support students and staff. This ranges from the provision of audio-visual equipment in our teaching rooms to more specialist services such as video production, live streaming, and AV support for events. 

To hire equipment please follow this link Media Services - Home (qmu.ac.uk) for further information before emailing media staff with your request via [email protected]

Guidance on Research involving Deaf Signed Language Users

If you are undertaking any research in this area, it is recommended that you initially discuss ideas with an academic with expertise in this field. This might be a deaf academic from another institution or relevant staff here at QMU. Dr Rachel Mapson ( [email protected] ) and Yvonne Waddell ( [email protected] ) are based within the Division of Speech and Hearing Sciences at QMU and will be happy to talk through the ethical implications and conduct of potential research. QMU guidance on Research involving Deaf Signed Language Users  

Research Centres, Institutes and Knowledge Exchange Centres

Our Work with Business & Industry

• A-Z Sitemap
• Indigenous Education
• Academic Calendars
• Course Schedule
• Dates & Deadlines
• Course Registration
• Faculty & Staff Links
• Williams Lake
• News & Events
• Career Connections
• Student Email
• Staff Email
• TRUemployee

Section Menu

• Office of the Vice-President Research
• Annual Research Report
• Graduate Programs
• Leaves of Absence with Permission
• Remote Thesis Defence Procedures
• Thesis Procedures
• Public Accessibility
• Western Deans' Agreement
• Workshops and Networking Events
• Graduate Studies Research Funding Opportunities
• Awards for Indigenous Graduate Students
• Graduate Commons
• Health and Wellness
• Faculty Resources
• Form and Resources
• Undergraduate Research Certificate
• Canada Research Chairs: Equity, Diversity and Inclusion
• Wildfire Science
• Partnership Expectations
• Internal Opportunities
• Research Awards
• Mentoring Student Research
• Student Research Assistants
• Forms and Resources
• Research Toolkit
• Post-Award Grant Administration

Research Ethics

• Policies and Practices
• Grants/Contracts Administration Form
• Animal Use Protocol Application
• Human Ethics Research Application
• Biohazardous Materials Use Application
• Committee Members
• Registration
• Research in Videos
• VP's Welcome
• Strategic Research Plan
• Research Support Fund
• Reports & Newsletter
• Publications
• Research Month

This page contains information to assist faculty and students in obtaining approvals to conduct research that involves humans, animals, and biohazards. All Ethics Application Forms (Human, Animal, and Biohazard) are accessible through the Romeo software system. Please click here for more information on Romeo.

Wondering where to start?

See our Ethics FAQ

Human Research Ethics Board

The Human Research Ethics Board is hosting a lunch series and drop-in sessions to chat about the REB application process for first time researchers and their supervisors.

Ethics and REB Processes for First-Time Researchers Wednesday, Oct. 25, 1 – 2 p.m. in OL 127 (for students and faculty)

Calling all UREAP, BIS, honours, directed studies, Knowledge Makers and graduate students, and all others conducting primary research for the first time! We'll chat about registering for ROMEO, the importance of the TCPS 2 Core Tutorial, and participant documents including consent forms. REB members will answer your questions about preparing your very first ethics application.

Supporting Student Ethics and REB Applications Wednesday, Nov. 29, 1 – 2 p.m. in HL 402 (for faculty)

The role of the supervisor is an important one for undergraduate and graduate research. One of the best ways to support a student's ethics application is by having a clear understanding of the TCPS 2 and offering a close initial review of the application prior to REB submission. Come and chat with REB members about best practices as a supervisor at the ethics review stage.

Ethics Online Chats Wednesdays, Oct. 18, Nov. 1 and Nov. 22, 1 – 3 p.m. on BigBlueButton (for students and faculty)

Drop in to REB's online chats to discuss your ethics questions and applications. Find us at bit.ly/TRUrebchat during these times.

All research involving human participants and/or their private records must receive approval by the Research Ethics Board (REB) prior to contacting potential participants and/or accessing private records. To determine whether your project requires REB approval, please contact the REB at [email protected] . The TRU REB is obliged to ensure compliance with the Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans – TCPS 2 (2022) (ethics.gc.ca) . REB members use the TCPS2 to guide their reviews and provide feedback to researchers. REB reviews are a peer review process by which the REB supports researchers by ensuring that their projects follow the TCPS2 guide. This is how the REB helps fulfill TRU’s contractual obligation to ensure that all researchers affiliated with TRU follow the TCPS2 guidelines in the conduct of their research and teaching.

*** All researchers that would have contact with participants (potential and actual) and/or their data must complete the free-of-charge, online tutorial found through this link . The tutorial takes approximately 4-6 hours to complete. You will receive a certificate of completion at the end of the tutorial. Please be sure to attach your certificate to your REB application for review. This certificate is required of all faculty and student researchers as a condition of REB approval.

REB Committee Members

Projects that pose above minimal risk are reviewed by the full board at an REB meeting. Please see the following tentative schedule of submission deadlines and REB meeting dates.

REB Deadlines and Meeting Dates

Research Ethics BC - The Harmonized Approach and Applications

In September of 2019 TRU joined the Research Ethics BC Harmonization Project to better help researchers with ethics applications that involve more than one university and/or health authority.  With one ethics application researchers can obtain ethics approval from multiple ethics boards at once by using the UBC RiSE application system. This new process if part of the BC AHSN network and Research Ethics BC.

How does Research Ethics BC facilitate health systems change in the province? What is their role inside the BC Academic Health Science Network?  "Who is Research Ethics BC?" begins to answer these questions. It's a short video that introduces REBC's network of stakeholders, and what supports this operational unit of BC AHSN can offer.

Please see the video developed by REBC Navigator Paola Pinto Vidal for further information. Watch the video here on BC AHSN’s YouTube Channel

The Review Process and Approximate Timelines for Minimal Risk Research

The REB’s goal is to provide a review to researchers within four weeks. This feedback will be sent to you through ROMEO. It will include instructions on how to revise and resubmit your application form based on the review/feedback. After you have re-submitted your application, if items are still outstanding, then the REB will request further revisions and clarifications. If no further clarification or revisions are required, then the REB will send you a Letter of Approval, and you can begin contacting human participants for data collection.

The time to obtain certification depends on several factors including volume of REB applications under review at the time. Reviews tend to take a little longer during peak periods such as September/October, and during vacation seasons such as August and over Christmas. Please keep this in mind as you plan your research project.

How do I submit an REB application in ROMEO?

Checklist of materials to include with your application

• Informed consent form. Please use this checklist to ensure that your consent form includes all the necessary information. Incomplete consent forms will be returned to you for completion. Consent Checklist Consent Template
• TCPS 2 Certificate of Completion
• Recruitment scripts such as: email script, poster, social media post, telephone script … word-for-word what you will say when you initiate contact with potential participants.
• Data collection tools such as: survey, questionnaire, interview questions, focus group discussion guide.
• Official letters of support to work with communities and organizations such as Indigenous communities and school districts. Please note that official letters of support come on letters with the organization’s letterhead. Email would not suffice.
• It may be appropriate for you to obtain a confidentiality agreement such as from your research assistants or from participants of focus groups, transcriptionists, and other circumstances. Please revise the following as needed for your study: Confidentiality Agreement

Step-by-step instructions for submitting an application in Romeo

If you have any further questions, then please do not hesitate to contact the REB: [email protected] .

Animal Care Committee

Submission Deadline: Continuous Intake

Thompson Rivers University (TRU) regards the use of animals in research, teaching, testing and production as a privilege and not a right. All individuals involved in the use of animals for research, teaching, testing and production must care for their animals in compliance with the TRU Animal Care Committee (TRU-ACC) protocols, the Canadian Council for Animal Care (CCAC) Guidelines and in accordance with Sections 444-447 of the Criminal Code of Canada and Section 24 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act.

Thompson Rivers University treats all animals used in teaching and research with the highest standards of ethical care and treatment, and has been recognized with a Certificate of Good Animal Practice issued by the Canadian Council on Animal Care.

Animal Care Committee Resources

• Annual Animal Use Data Reporting Form
• CCAC Categories of Invasiveness in Animal Experiments
• CCAC Categories of Invasiveness in Wildlife Studies

Please contact [email protected] if you have any questions.

Biosafety Committee

All Biosafety resources are now found in the TRU Romeo system. This includes Biosafety Application and Standard Operating Procedure forms.

Please refer to our Biosafety website for additional  information.  https://www.tru.ca/hsafety/biosafety.html

This office is supported by the federal Research Support Fund . The Fund assists Canadian post-secondary institutions to maintain a world-class research environment, which includes human ethics, animal care and biosafety.

• Terms & Privacy
• Emergency Information
• Accreditation
• Accessibility Feedback
• Current Students
• Prospective Students
• Open Learning Students
• Faculty & Staff
• Financial Aid
• All Student Services
• Careers at TRU
• News & Events
• Conference Centre
• Room Bookings

• Economic growth Boosting skills and increasing prosperity
• Transforming health Improving healthcare and developing talent
• Undergraduate open days
• Order a prospectus
• Subject areas
• Why study at Manchester Met?
• Chat to our current students
• How to apply
• Schools and colleges
• Parents and guardians
• Mature students
• Online learning
• Admissions policies and procedures
• Virtual tour
• Postgraduate open days
• Join us in January 2024
• Find a postgraduate course
• Professional development
• Research study
• Information for employers
• Funding and the levy
• Employer case studies
• Apprenticeship information for students
• Student case studies
• Apprenticeship Research Unit
• How to apply for accommodation
• Living in halls
• Your contract
• Rent a private property
• Course enquiries Ask us a question
• Find your country
• Before you apply
• When you have an offer
• Apply for your visa
• Exchange to Manchester Metropolitan
• Study abroad
• Becoming a partner
• Innovation Work with world-leading academics
• Leadership and growth Get training and support from specialists
• Talent, recruitment and development Connect with our students. Develop your people
• Conferences and events Hire our spaces, technology and facilities
• Championing creative excellence
• Driving economic growth
• Leading sustainability
• Tackling inequalities
• Transforming health
• Case studies
• Research Excellence Framework
• Engaging the public with our research
• Equality, Diversity and Inclusion
• Our commitment to researchers
• Why study a doctoral degree
• Choose Manchester Met
• PhDs and Doctoral Degrees
• Research degree subjects
• Postgraduate research fees
• Scholarships
• Doctoral College
• News and events
• Academic partnerships
• Ethics and Governance
• Responsible metrics
• Internationalisation
• Board of Governors
• Vice-Chancellor
• University Executive Group
• Faculty of Arts and Humanities
• Faculty of Business and Law
• Faculty of Health and Education
• Faculty of Science and Engineering
• Institute for Children's Futures
• Institute of Sport
• Professional Services
• Honorary graduates
• Environment
• Equity, Diversity and Inclusion
• Close Search mmu.ac.uk Search
• Economic growth
• Undergraduate
• Postgraduate
• Apprenticeships
• Become a degree apprentice
• Accommodation
• Course enquiries
• International
• Study at Manchester Met
• International partnerships
• Business and employers
• Leadership and growth
• Talent, recruitment and development
• Conferences and events
• Our research
• Research Integrity
• Our strategy
• Current students

Research ethics and governance

Find guidance on research ethics and governance - setting out the high standards that are expected of researchers at a world-class university.

Research ethics

Research ethics are principles that guide how you should work with:

• research participants, their data or tissue
• other researchers and colleagues
• users of your research
• others you engage with

Research ethics are part of good governance and apply to all research conducted at the University. Failure to gain an appropriate approval can be treated as misconduct.

Research governance

Research governance is the broad framework and principles that we use to ensure that the quality of research is consistent with the high standards that are expected of a world-class university.

This includes policies for ensuring that we are compliant with agendas such as research integrity, open access and research data management. It improves research by:

• safeguarding participants in research
• protecting researchers and investigators by providing clear frameworks
• enhancing scientific quality and ethical awareness
• minimising risk
• monitoring practice and performance and preventing misconduct
• promoting good practice and ensuring lessons are learned

The links on this page will help you comply with the University’s ethical standards.

• University research ethics approval
• Applying for ethical approval
• External ethical approvals
• HRA/NHS and university approval
• Human Tissue Act and university approval
• Nagoya Protocol
• Standard operating procedures
• EthOS guidance
• Researchfish Guidance
• Research Data Storage
• Contacts for research ethics and governance

Natural Resources Job Board

OUR SPONSORS AND PARTNERS

Regional Communications Specialist- Aquatics

Pheasants Forever, Inc (Private) | http://www.pheasantsforever.org

Description

• Creates news releases, website content, and publication articles in collaboration with USDA’s Natural Resource Conservation Service staff.
• Main focus of content will fall within the Working Lands for Wildlife – Aquatic Connectivity Framework region. 
• Works collaboratively with contractors managing and maintaining the Landscape Partnership Portal ( https://www.landscapepartnership.org/ ) where all content produced will be cross-posted.
• Works with the organization’s state leadership teams to source habitat successes, unique projects, and newsworthy content 
• Works closely with Working Lands for Wildlife staff to create cohesive conservation messaging. 
• Builds and manages relationships with journalists in his/her defined region to generate earned media coverage.
• Assesses newsworthy stories for value as internal content (journals, website, social media, etc.) and viability as a media pitch to garner external coverage for the organization’s brand, mission, and successes.
• Serves as an organizational spokesperson with the media, while coordinating interview opportunities for organization’s leaders and partners in their specific region
• Maintain/build relationships with local/regional media, in addition to various outdoor writer associations.
• Maintain the highest code of conservation ethics.
• Other duties as assigned.

View Location

A member of Texas A&M AgriLife

Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service | Texas A&M AgriLife Research | Texas A&M Forest Service | Texas A&M AgriLife Veterinary Medical Diagnostic Lab | College of Agriculture & Life Sciences

Unearthing Texas Histories

April 25, 2024, 12:00-3:00 pm, glas 311 or zoom.

In this final event of the Humanities, Land, Sea, Space (HLSS) Initiative , COMM graduate student Valentina Aduen will reflect on her recent fieldwork with the descendants of freedom colonies in Crockett, Texas, who are dealing with the negative environmental impacts of pipelines running through property over which they have tenuous control. Dr. Amanda Mixon (Texas State University) will share their archival research on gay bars, community formation, racial dynamics, policing practices, cultural representations, and military suasion in San Antonio to highlight the ongoing need for further exploration and study of historic gay spaces across Texas. Invited artist JD Pluecker will give a lecture about her ongoing project "The Unsettlements" which traces the impacts of eight generations of her mainly German settler-colonial family in Houston and across so-called Texas by attending to site-specific histories of memory, silence, and memorialization. HLSS Initiative founder Dr. Emily Brady and current convener Dr. AJ Baginski will reflect on what the Initiative has made possible in terms of the Environmental Humanities at Texas A&M and elsewhere.

Let's Talk....Research Ethics and Compliance

Are you planning on undertaking research that involves the use of human participants, animals, controlled goods, biological agents or chemicals?

This workshop will introduce you to the many resources and tools available to support the research ethics review process at Ryerson, in addition to information on other compliance requirements. Topics covered include: 

• Brief introduction to the research ethics framework and review process
• Define the scope of review (What kind of research requires REB review? What is exempt?) 
• Provide guidance and best practices on how to submit a successful ethics application 
• Connect with the Ryerson research ethics team and ask questions about your own research program. 

Presented by the Ryerson Research Ethics Board (REB)