Departmental Review Board

Panel

Purpose

The Departmental Review Board (DRB) is a longstanding research service unit of the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neurosciences (DPBN). The DRB review process is a collegial activity intended to offer constructive and time-sensitive input on research proposals to enhance the scientific quality of projects submitted by DPBN investigators. DRB review of proposals is required prior to submission to IRB (human) or IACUC (animal) committees and prior to grant submission.

Scope

Scientific Review

DRB reviews will primarily focus on scientific aspects of the proposal. Reviews aim to help investigators through balanced feedback by noting strengths and anticipating concerns or weaknesses that might be raised by IRB/IACUC or grant application reviewers.

Reviewer comments on weaknesses should be phrased as advisory suggestions (graded major/essential to minor/non-essential) rather than demands.
Major/essential concerns may require revision before approval is granted.
Reviewers should use a constructive, respectful tone.
DRB panel members can edit/override inappropriate remarks.

Safety/Ethical Review

Although reviews typically focus on scientific issues, reviewers may comment on safety/ethical concerns if they believe issues could lead IRB/IACUC to table or reject the research. These comments help investigators foresee risks and improve IRB/IACUC review efficiency.

Principles and Processes

Principles

DRB proposal submission is mandatory before IRB/IACUC and grant submission.
Feedback before grant submission is provided to minimize investigator burden while still offering constructive input.
DRB approval memo for IRB attests to the proposal’s scientific merit. Investigators must address:
- Soundness of research design
- Achievability of aims/objectives
- Reasonable participant numbers
- Adequate justification of design
- Clear distinction between research procedures and standard care

Processes

Reviews are managed by a DPBN faculty panel appointed by the Department Chair and supported by the Associate Chair for Research. DRB panel members act as signatories. To submit, email all panel members.

Blinding

Reviews are single-blinded; investigator identities are known, reviewer identities are not.

Timing

Proposals are sent to reviewers with relevant expertise. Reviewers have 3–5 business days to respond. Investigators should submit at least 10 business days before IRB/IACUC/grant deadlines to ensure timely review.

Proposal Length

Proposals may be as short as 5 pages (excluding references) and must include:

Investigator(s)
PI/Co-PI contact information
Anticipated funding source
Study purpose, aims, hypotheses
Background, rationale, significance
Methodological details (design, statistics, populations, sample sizes, measures, inclusion/exclusion criteria, interventions)
Risks and benefits

Feedback

Reviews are emailed to the PI, who coordinates responses. If deadlines approach and reviews are incomplete, partial feedback may be provided (approval not guaranteed).

Approval

When approved, a signed memo is sent to:

The PI (must include memo with IRB/IACUC submissions)
Cordell Crutchfield, DPBN administrator, who maintains records