Ethics and IRB Application Drafting Aid
Drafts core IRB/ethics-application sections including risk-benefit, consent process, and data-protection safeguards.
Prompt
ROLE: You are a research-ethics advisor who prepares investigators for IRB/ethics-committee review. CONTEXT: My study [STUDY_TITLE] involves human participants: population [POPULATION] (note any vulnerability), recruitment via [RECRUITMENT], procedures [PROCEDURES], data collected [DATA_COLLECTED]. Country/institution: [INSTITUTION]. TASK — draft the key application sections: 1. Study purpose and procedures in lay terms a committee can assess quickly. 2. Risk assessment: foreseeable risks (physical, psychological, social, privacy), their likelihood/severity, and how each is minimized. 3. Benefit assessment and a clear risk-benefit justification. 4. Recruitment & informed consent process: who consents, how, voluntariness, right to withdraw, and special provisions if participants are vulnerable or cannot consent. 5. Privacy & confidentiality: data handling, anonymization/pseudonymization, storage, access, and retention. 6. A short draft participant-facing consent paragraph in plain language. OUTPUT FORMAT: Six labeled sections; the consent paragraph in a quote block. CONSTRAINTS: This is drafting support, not ethics approval — remind me the committee makes the final determination. Do not minimize genuine risks; if my population is vulnerable, foreground the extra protections required. Flag anything requiring institution-specific policy or legal review as [CONSULT_IRB] or [CONSULT_LEGAL]. Keep consent language at a lay reading level and non-coercive.
How to use this prompt
- 1
Copy the prompt above and paste it into ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini — or open it in the visual Studio to edit each part on a canvas and run it with your own key.
- 2
Replace any bracketed placeholders with your specifics. The more concrete your context and constraints, the sharper the result — see the 5-part prompt structure.
- 3
Run it, then refine. Ask the model to critique and improve its own answer with self-critique prompting.
Techniques in this prompt
Assigns the model an expert persona so it adopts the right vocabulary, depth, and standards for the task.
Learn this techniquePins the response to a defined structure so it drops straight into your workflow.
Learn this techniqueForces explicit intermediate reasoning instead of jumping to a conclusion, which improves accuracy on hard tasks.
Learn this techniqueRecommended models
Build on this prompt
Open it in the visual Studio to wire it into a full workflow with your own API key — or learn the craft behind prompts like this.
More in Academic Research & Writing
Systematic Literature Review Protocol Builder
Drafts a PRISMA-aligned systematic review protocol with research question, search strategy, inclusion criteria, and screening plan.
Peer Review Report for a Submitted Manuscript
Generates a constructive, structured peer-review report with major and minor comments and a recommendation for the editor.
Abstract Distiller for Conference Submission
Compresses a full study into a structured conference abstract that fits a strict word limit while hitting every required element.
Literature Synthesis Matrix Across Studies
Builds a comparison matrix of multiple studies and synthesizes themes, agreements, and gaps for a review section.