See It in Action
Six realistic protocols — one for every IRB review pathway. Each card shows the computed review determination. Click Preview Report to read the full generated Protocol Description and Consent Form — no login or credits needed.
Lowest oversight level. Excused from continuing review. Typically anonymous surveys, public data, or normal educational practices.
Reviewed by IRB Chair only. Minimal-risk research that doesn't qualify for exemption — recordings, identifiable interviews, minor venipuncture.
Full committee vote required. Greater-than-minimal risk, prisoner research, or deception without proper debriefing.
Exempt Studies
45 CFR 46.104(d)
Digital Learning Preferences Survey
An anonymous Qualtrics survey exploring how community college students prefer to receive instructional content (synchronous vs. asynchronous, video vs. text). No identifiers collected. Adults only.
- Research involves educational tests, surveys, interviews, or observation of public behavior.
- Disclosure of responses would not reasonably place subjects at risk of harm.
- 45 CFR 46.104(d)(2)
Key Recommendations
STEM Graduation Trends (Public Data)
Longitudinal analysis of five-year STEM graduation-rate trends using publicly available IPEDS data. No human subject interaction whatsoever — purely secondary analysis of institutional-level aggregated data.
- Research uses existing data, documents, or specimens that are publicly available.
- 45 CFR 46.104(d)(4)(i)
Key Recommendations
Expedited Studies
45 CFR 46.110
Teacher Perspectives on Culturally Responsive Pedagogy
Semi-structured qualitative interviews with urban K-12 teachers exploring their understanding and implementation of culturally responsive pedagogy. Identifiable participants (names + institutions collected for follow-up). Minimal risk.
- Research involves noninvasive data collection with identifiable information or vulnerable populations.
- Qualifies for Expedited review as minimal risk research.
- 45 CFR 46.110(b)(1), Category 4
Key Recommendations
Graduate Student Self-Efficacy Focus Groups (Recorded)
Video-recorded focus groups exploring barriers to academic self-efficacy among first-generation doctoral students. Participants are audio/video recorded; assigned pseudonyms; minimal risk. Recording requirement triggers Expedited Category 6.
- Research involves collection of data from voice, video, digital, or image recordings.
- 45 CFR 46.110(b)(1), Category 6
Key Recommendations
Full Board Studies
45 CFR 46.108
Cooperative Learning RCT (Elementary Students)
Randomized controlled trial testing a cooperative-learning math intervention with elementary students (ages 8–11). Involves minors, randomization to intervention/control, greater-than-minimal risk due to academic impact, and potential stigmatization. Requires Full Board review.
- Research involves greater than minimal risk to participants.
Key Recommendations
Doctoral Burnout: Longitudinal Mixed Methods
Longitudinal mixed-methods study of burnout and attrition risk among doctoral students using clinical psychological measures (PHQ-9, Maslach Burnout Inventory). Greater-than-minimal psychological risk, certificate of confidentiality, 6-month follow-up. Full Board required.
- Research involves greater than minimal risk to participants.
Key Recommendations
Three Ways to Explore
Read It Here
Click "Preview Report" on any card to open the full Protocol Description and Consent Form right on this page — no login, no credits needed.
Explore the Wizard
"Open in Wizard" drops you at Step 9 with all steps pre-filled. Navigate freely to compare how the Exempt and Full Board protocols differ at every step.
Run the AI
From Step 9, use 1 credit to run the AI assessment — see how Claude's analysis compares to the rules-based determination, then generate your final documents.
These are fictional study examples created for demonstration purposes only. Names, institutions, and study details are illustrative. Always consult your institution's IRB office before submitting any actual research protocol.