Application Process

Activities Requiring REB Review

These activities require REB review and approval prior to start.

Research involving:

• Living human participants;
• Human biological materials, whether the individual is living or deceased; or 
• Human data that contains, or at some point contained, personal identifiers.

---

Activities that May Not Require REB Review

The activities below may be exempt from REB review. It is the responsibility of researchers to seek exemption from the REB Chair. Researchers who choose to self-determine whether an activity is exempt and is incorrect, cannot seek ethics review retroactively.  

1. Research that relies exclusively on publicly available information when:
   • Legally accessible to the public, and appropriately protected by law; or
   • There is no reasonable expectation of privacy for those whom the information is about;
2. Research involving the observation of people in public places where:
   • It does not involve any intervention by the researcher or direct interaction with the individuals or groups;
   • Individuals or groups observed have no reasonable expectation of privacy; and
   • Any dissemination of research results does not allow for identification of specific individuals.
3. Research that relies exclusively on secondary use of anonymous (where identifiers were never collected) human data or biological materials, where
   • The process of data linkage, recording, or dissemination of results does not generate identifiable information.
4. Activities not defined as research, including:
   • Quality assurance and quality improvement activities;
   • Program evaluation; or
   • Testing within normal education requirements, when used exclusively for assessment, management or improvement purposes.
5. Creative practice activities that do not include a human research component.
6. Research involving re-use of de-identified human somatic cell lines* where the researcher:
   • Will comply with known consent terms;
   • Does not know or have access to the identity of the participant;
   • Will not take any steps to identify the participant; and
   • Is unlikely to reveal the identity of the participant.
7. Research involving re-use of identified human somatic cell lines where:
   • The cell line is already available and identified in the public domain;
   • It is impossible or impracticable to seek participant consent;
   • The researcher will comply with known consent terms; and
   • The research is unlikely to harm the participant.
   • They do not originate from an Indigenous community within Canada or internationally.

---

Multi-Jurisdictional Research and Board of Record 

Research that involves UWindsor and other institutions is multi-jurisdictional research (MJR). There are various ways that MJR is handled by the UWin REB, depending on the role that UWindsor and the other institution(s) play(s).   

1. Principal Investigator (PI) is at UWindsor

   For human research that involves a multi-jurisdictional team, but where the PI is at UWindsor, UWin REB review is required. Co-investigators (Co-Is) may need to apply to their respective REB(s) for review or utilize administrative procedures to accept the UWin REB approval, once received.

2. UWindsor holds a Board of Record (BoR) agreement

   Some institutions have entered a BoR agreement with UWindsor. These currently include:

   • Hôtel-Dieu Grace Healthcare (HDGH)
   • Erie Shores HealthCare

   For research from these institutions, please contact the respective research administrator to determine how submission to the UWin REB must be done.

3. UWindsor’s only role is recruitment

   For research being led by an external PI and research team, and for which UWindsor is a site for recruitment of prospective participants, submission for administrative review by the UWin REB is required. A copy of the approved protocol, from the BoR and approval letter, and Executive Review cover letter should be submitted to ethics@uwindsor.ca.

4. UWindsor is receiving funds from a US Federal agency

   Whether acting as PI or Co-I, receiving a grant or a subgrant, if you plan on being involved in conducting research funded by the US, please contact us regarding UWindsor’s Federal Wide Assurance (FWA) and how best to navigate requirements from both the US and Canada.

5. The UWindsor PI is conducting international research, with or without a Co-I in the host country.

   Research that will take place in other countries may need to receive ethics review or other, whether formal or informal, as appropriate. It is the responsibility of the PI to determine what the requirements are of the relevant jurisdiction and ensure that the rules are followed.

For any questions regarding process for MJR, please contact the ORE at ethics@uwindsor.ca. 

---

Determination of Full Board or Delegated Review

The REB review process is determined primarily by the overall risk of the research, which consists of physical/physiological, psychological/emotional, legal, and economic. While the default process is Full Board review, research with risks determined to be no greater than those experienced in daily life* may be reviewed through the Delegated process. 

*TCPS definition of “minimal risk” also looks at vulnerable circumstances of participants, as to not “exacerbate their vulnerability”.

Full Board review is conducted at scheduled meetings, while Delegated review is conducted by the REB Chair and/or Vice-Chair, and ORE staff. Applications that are determined to require Full Board review will be assigned to a meeting with sufficient time for REB members to review them fully. It is the researcher’s responsibility to submit their applications.