
Followup: That cool ICU checklist cancelled by federal agency - dcurtis
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/opinion/30gawande.html?_r=1&ex=1356670800&en=8a0773d58d0dec11&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin
======
gojomo
The consumerist thread got the news from this NYTimes op-ed (by the same
author as the previous NewYorker article):

[http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/opinion/30gawande.html?ex=...](http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/opinion/30gawande.html?ex=1356670800&en=3f54f6a7a541f033&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink)

Seems like the "Office for Human Research Protections" should remember:
"First, do no harm."

~~~
dcurtis
Yeah, it seems pretty stupid that such an amazingly effective change it
treatment would warrant this kind of negative reaction from the government. If
a hospital changes the way doctors write up their charts to make previous
treatment more visible, is that considered a "drug trial" like this?

Regardless, unlike testing drugs on people without their consent, using a
checklist or other types of charting has practically zero chance of causing
death.

The OHRP's response is asinine.

------
joshwa
Here's the actual letter from the HHS OHRP:

<http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/detrm_letrs/YR07/nov07b.pdf>

It seems that as long as the IRB (Institutional Review Board) waives the
consent requirement, the program may be able to continue.

------
dcurtis
This is following up a story posted recently:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=87167>

------
redorb
<sike> seems logical </sike>

~~~
randallsquared
Just FYI, it's "psych".

------
joeguilmette
hey this is a great story!

