What may be a reason for an institution to rely on another IRB's review?

An institution may rely on another Institutional Review Board (IRB) for several pragmatic reasons that enhance the overall efficiency and timeliness of the research process.

One significant reason is the lack of resources to conduct its own thorough and timely review. Some institutions, especially smaller ones or those with limited staff, may not have the capacity to perform comprehensive IRB reviews in-house. By relying on another IRB that has the necessary expertise and resources, they can ensure that the research is still subject to rigorous ethical oversight without overextending their own capabilities.

Additionally, relying on another IRB can notably expedite the research process. When multiple institutions are involved in a study, coordinating evaluations can be time-consuming if each IRB conducts its own review. By utilizing the review of an established IRB, the research can move forward more quickly, minimizing delays that could impede the initiation of the study and the collection of valuable data.

Thus, the correct answer encompasses both the necessity due to limited resources and the benefit of speeding up the research process, highlighting the practical considerations that institutions must weigh when managing IRB reviews for human subject research.