
doi: 10.1002/eahr.60022
pmid: 40329595
ABSTRACTThis study investigated the perceptions of institutional review board (IRB) professionals regarding the use of gender‐neutral language in IRB guidance and informed consent documents, and whether respondents’ IRBs incorporated gender‐neutral language in those documents. A survey was disseminated to a diverse group of IRB professionals whose emails were generated from a list received from the Office for Human Research Protections. Responses indicated substantial endorsement of gender‐neutral language, although actual usage remains limited. The findings suggest that while the willingness to adopt inclusive language is high, barriers such as resource limitations and a lack of regulatory guidelines often impede its broader application. This study underscores the importance of developing explicit guidelines and resources to facilitate the adoption of gender‐neutral language, enhancing inclusivity in research settings.
Male, Adult, Informed Consent, Surveys and Questionnaires, Humans, Female, Ethics Committees, Research, Language
Male, Adult, Informed Consent, Surveys and Questionnaires, Humans, Female, Ethics Committees, Research, Language
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 1 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
