Why its important to support student researchers, according to this Houston expert

houston voices

Students and faculty sponsors work in tandem to design and implement a research or scholarly project, and its important to support the student aspect of the equation. Graphic by Miguel Tovar/University of Houston

Do you remember the feeling you had the first time sitting at the wheel of a car? Were you overcome by the feeling of excitement, anticipation, fear, or perhaps a combination of them all? For many, obtaining a driver’s license is a rite of passage; a symbol that you are equipped with both the knowledge and skill of how to safely operate a motor vehicle. This achievement, however, would not have been made possible without the sacrifice of devoting hours to driver’s education and training under a supervisor.

Forging new paths

By the same token, college students who have dedicated years of study in various academic fields may also be ambivalent about conducting research. They will be in dire need of an experienced researcher’s guidance as they navigate down the unfamiliar road of academic research. It is their responsibility to help shape the student’s research interests and forge new paths.

By fostering student-led research, faculty sponsors can assist students by aligning their educational experiences with their career goals. This positions them for compelling careers in academic research.

Student at the wheel

Before a student can be placed in the driver’s seat of their own research protocol, they must be fully equipped with the right tools. If not, they will begin this journey without clear direction. Such was the case of several students at an unnamed university who conducted more than minimal risk studies without IRB approval.

The students started the protocol but were advised by their faculty sponsor that IRB approval wasn’t necessary before conducting research. One of the students rode in ambulances collecting data. They published their findings and even graduated before this was brought to the attention of the university’s Office of Compliance. This is a clear case of noncompliance and the severity of this issue is similar to driving a car without a license.

The Institutional Review Board (IRB) is the governing entity for human subject research. Their role isn’t primarily a research review process. It ensures that human subjects are treated ethically and that their rights are protected. This brought up issues of consent, confidentiality, and potential risk to human subjects and was an example of significant non-compliance.

Federal regulations and university policy mandate IRB approval for research involving human subjects. The requisite applies to faculty, staff and students. The availability of options may create more questions than answers when submitting their first student-led research protocol.

Mapping it out

The University of Houston has taken steps to manage research compliance and optimize student success. It established an Institutional Review Board that reviews only student-led protocols. It’s unique in that very few institutions have this sort of program available. In the two years since its inception, the program has become a transformative resource for both students and their faculty advisors.

Faculty and student protocols are typically grouped together. However, the UH Student IRB Program gives them a single point of contact for IRB-related concerns and individualized support.

The UH Office of Research Integrity and Oversight (RIO) has established an infrastructure to support student-led research through their pre-IRB review process. Students are encouraged to drop by to seek advice or brainstorm with a coordinator. Services, training and educational materials, such as the Faculty Sponsor Manual, are also available to support faculty sponsors.

The submission process can be pretty daunting. Kirstin Holzschuh, executive director of RIO, mentioned that students are unfamilar with the IRB requirements and process. As a result, their protocols would often be sent back for significant revisions. The pre-review system helps eliminate the possibility of their protocols getting stuck in the review process.

Representatives from this office regularly interface with the UH research community. They travel to various colleges and departments across campus and guest lecture on the IRB submission process. They also talk about the ethics of conducting research with human subjects.

Students and faculty sponsors work in tandem to design and implement a research or scholarly project. Therefore, it’s imperative to cultivate an environment where student researchers feel informed and supported by their advisors and the UH community.

------

This article originally appeared on the University of Houston's The Big Idea. Nitiya Spearman, the author of this post, is the internal communications coordinator for the UH Division of Research.

To err is human, after all. Graphic by Miguel Tovar/University of Houston

University of Houston: Navigating non-compliance and human error in research

houston voices

To comply is to obey, or conform to instruction or official requirements. In a perfect world, research non-compliance wouldn’t occur and following the rules would be a behavioral norm. But the reality is, to err is human.

To err is human

Often times the judgement of our own, and others, poor decision-making is rooted in the innate tendency to view things in black or white – categorizing behaviors as either right or wrong, good or bad, thus deeming them as either ethical or unethical.

But this way of thinking often conflicts with the gray world in which we exist. So what happens when research decisions land somewhere in the moral gray area?

Before answering, here are two situations to consider that involve the over-enrollment of research participants:

Case 1:
The IRB has approved a survey for 40 subjects. The PI realizes after the survey has been open for several weeks that she forgot to set a participant limit within the survey program and 60 subjects have completed the survey.

Case 2:

A study involving a new drug to control diabetes symptoms is approved to enroll 30 participants. The study doctor thinks the drug may be beneficial, so she continues enrolling, for a total of 80 subjects.

The devil is in the details

Why is over-enrollment of subjects considered non-compliance?

Many institutions have agreed, within their assurance to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), to apply the Common Rule to all human subjects research, whether the research is funded or not.

The Common Rule regulations found at 45 CFR 46.109(a) and 45 CFR 46.111 (1) state that the IRB shall review and have authority to approve, require modifications in (to secure approval), or disapprove all research activities. This includes the maximum number of research .

And what must the IRB review?

Under the above regulatory requirements, the IRB must evaluate all instances of non-compliance.

In these cases of over-enrollment, the IRB must review the number of subjects over-enrolled and assess any potential effects on additional subjects and/or the research, as well as determine if the noncompliant data may be used for research purposes.

What UH IRB says about Case 1:

While over-enrollment in a survey seems low-risk, depending on the content of the survey questions, the IRB could determine the issue to be more serious, such as for a study collecting data related to illegal substance use or questions about traumatic events (legal or psychological harm). The IRB must ensure that risks to subjects are minimized; only the number of subjects needed to statistically justify the research are approved. Depending on the number of subjects over-enrolled and the time period over which they participated, the non-compliance could also be considered continuing.

What UH IRB says about Case 2:

Investigational drug studies often pose more than minimal risk of harm to subjects. In these studies, it is even more critical to ensure that additional subjects are not exposed to potential harms without scientific justification

In a drug study, the PI may not continue a study based on opinion; the reason a physician is blinded to treatment assignment in many drug studies is to avoid potential bias.

Finding non-compliance: What can you do?

If the number of subjects enrolled exceeds the number approved by the IRB, a finding of non-compliance is justified. The IRB will review the numbers, the Principal Investigator’s reasons for over-enrollment and assess what procedures were conducted in these subjects. Often over-enrollment is inadvertent, however the committee also has the ultimate authority to determine whether the data may be used for research purposes.

Corrective actions, such as continuing education of the PI and/or study team to ensure this issue does not occur again in the future, are often required. In the most serious cases, the IRB may suspend or terminate approval.

If the non-compliance rises to the level of being serious (harms or has the potential to harm subjects or others) and/or continuing in nature, it must be reported to federal oversight agencies such as the Health and Human Services Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP) and the FDA. These agencies ensure that the institution is monitoring for these activities and puts appropriate fixes in place.

The importance of intetrity

Non-compliant research can be due to inadvertent errors or deliberate acts of noncompliance. The results could be the same. Human subjects could be harmed. Funding and reputation at an institution conducting research could be negatively affected. In times of reduced federal funding for basic research, there are direct financial costs to the agencies when funds and resources are misused.

The responsibility of ensuring that research protocols are adhered to rests upon the shoulders of the researchers involved.

If you were a member on the IRB, what would you consider to be appropriate consequences for the PI in these situations?

It’s important to note that non-compliance, whether it’s a “little white lie/inadvertent error” or a deliberate violation of the approved protocol can undermine the integrity of both the research process and the academic research enterprise.

------

This article originally appeared on the University of Houston's The Big Idea. Nitiya Spearman, the author of this post, is the internal communications coordinator for the UH Division of Research.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Property Showcase

Rice University partners with astronaut foundation to offer new STEM scholarship

space scholars

Rice University has partnered with The Astronaut Scholarship Foundation (ASF) to offer a new scholarship opportunity for junior or senior STEM majors, beginning this spring.

The prestigious Astronaut Scholarship includes up to $15,000, mentorship, networking and a paid trip to the ASF Innovators Symposium and Gala. The scholarship is funded by the James A. Lovell Jr. Family Endowment, in honor of the late American astronaut and founder of the ASF.

“This scholarship opportunity represents an exciting new avenue for Rice STEM students to synthesize their experiences in courses and research and their commitment to advancing the public good as leaders in their field,” Danika Brown, executive director for the Center for Civic Leadership at Rice, said in a news release. “We are so grateful to the Lovell family and to the foundation for investing in Rice students, and we are confident that the foundation will be impressed with our nominees and that selected students will have a life-changing experience as astronaut scholars.”

The Rice Space Institute and the Center for Civic Learning recently hosted the ASF at the Ralph S. O’Connor Building for Engineering and Science.

At the ASF event, Jeff Lovell—son of James Lovell, who commanded Apollo 13 and flew on Apollo 8—announced the scholarship aimed at Rice STEM students. Charlie Duke, who served as spacecraft communicator for the Apollo 11 Moon landing and as the lunar module pilot for Apollo 16, also spoke at the event.

The ASF awarded 74 scholarships to students from 51 universities across the U.S. last May.

The ASF awarded its first seven $1,000 scholarships in 1986 to pay tribute to the Mercury 7 astronauts. It has since awarded more than $10 million to more than 850 college students.

So far, only students from Texas A&M University and the University of Texas at Austin have received the scholarship in Texas.

Houston hospital first in U.S. to use new system for minimally invasive surgery

sharper images

Houston’s Baylor St. Luke’s Medical Center has introduced an innovative new surgical imaging system that will allow surgeons to increase the number of minimally invasive procedures as well as reposition on the fly during operations.

Minimally invasive surgery has been shown across the board to improve patient outcomes with less chance of infection and shorter recovery times compared to traditional open surgery. However, the human body is not exactly easy to work on through small incisions, necessitating the development of state-of-the-art cameras and imaging technology to guide surgeons.

Enter GE HealthCare’s Allia Moveo, now a part of the Baylor St. Luke’s Medical Center operating room. Using cutting-edge technology, it uses the same high-definition imaging usually seen in the catheterization lab at speeds fast enough to respond to shifting surgical conditions. Its cable-free setup allows surgeons to switch positions much faster, and it features advanced 3D imaging that compensates for breathing motion and interference from metal implants.

Its design supports a range of cardiovascular, vascular, non-vascular, interventional and surgical procedures, according to CommonSpirit Health, a nonprofit Catholic health network, of which Baylor St. Luke's is a member.

“This innovative platform enhances how our clinicians navigate complex minimally invasive procedures by improving mobility, image clarity, and workflow efficiency. It strengthens our ability to deliver precise, patient-centered care while supporting our teams with technology designed for the evolving demands of modern interventional medicine,” Dr. Brad Lembcke, president of Baylor St. Luke’s Medical Center, said in a news release from Baylor and the Texas Heart Institute.

Baylor St. Luke’s is the first hospital in the U.S. to use the Allia Moveo technology. The definition and responsiveness of the new system allow surgeons to navigate the body with greater accuracy and smaller incisions, even for very delicate operations.

“Allia Moveo gives us the flexibility and image quality needed to manage increasingly complex minimally invasive procedures with greater confidence,” Dr. Gustavo Oderich, vascular surgeon and professor of surgery at Baylor College of Medicine, added in the release. “The ability to quickly reposition the system, obtain high-quality 3D imaging, and integrate advanced guidance tools directly into the workflow enhances procedural accuracy. This technology supports our mission to push the boundaries of what is possible in endovascular and interventional surgery.”

Houston clocks in as one of the hardest working cities in America

Ranking It

Houston and its residents are proving their tenacity as some of the hardest working Americans in 2026, so says a new study.

WalletHub's annual "Hardest-Working Cities in America (2026)" report ranked Houston the 37th most hardworking city nationwide. H-town last appeared as the 28th most industrious American city in 2025, but it still remains among the top 50.

The personal finance website evaluated 116 U.S. cities based on 11 key indicators across "direct" and "indirect" work factors, such as an individual's average workweek hours, average commute times, employment rates, and more.

The U.S. cities that comprised the top five include Cheyenne, Wyoming (No. 1); Anchorage, Alaska (No. 2); Washington, D.C. (No. 2); Sioux Falls, South Dakota (No. 4); and Irving, Texas (No. 5). Dallas and Austin also earned a spot among the top 10, landing as No. 7 and No. 10, respectively.

Based on the report's findings, Houston has the No. 31-best "direct work factors" ranking in the nation, which analyzed residents' average workweek hours, employment rates, the share of households where no adults work, the share of workers leaving vacation time unused, the share of "engaged" workers, and the rate of "idle youth" (residents aged 16-24 that are not in school nor have a job).

However, Houston lagged behind in the "indirect work factors" ranking, landing at No. 77 out of all 116 cities in the report. "Indirect" work factors that were considered include residents' average commute times, the share of workers with multiple jobs, the share of residents who participate in local groups or organizations, annual volunteer hours, and residents' average leisure time spent per day.

Based on data from The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), WalletHub said the average American employee works hundreds of more hours than workers residing in "several other industrialized nations."

"The typical American puts in 1,796 hours per year – 179 more than in Japan, 284 more than in the U.K., and 465 more than in Germany," the report's author wrote. "In recent years, the rise of remote work has, in some cases, extended work hours even further."

WalletHub also tracked the nation's lowest and highest employment rates based on the largest city in each state from 2009 to 2024.

ranking

Source: WalletHub

Other Texas cities that earned spots on the list include Fort Worth (No. 13), Corpus Christi (No. 14), Arlington (No. 15), Plano (No. 17), Laredo (No. 22), Garland (No. 24), El Paso (No. 43), Lubbock (No. 46), and San Antonio (No. 61).

Data for this study was sourced from the U.S. Census Bureau, Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Travel Association, Gallup, Social Science Research Council, and the Corporation for National & Community Service as of January 29, 2026.

---

This article originally appeared on CultureMap.com.

View All Listings