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

Rice University launches new venture fund for university-affiliated startups

startup support

Rice University has launched its new One Giant Leap Ventures Fund I, which will invest in the university’s spinouts and alumni-founded startups.

The early-stage institutional venture fund will function with a hybrid structure that allows for participation from traditional equity investors and philanthropic investors. According to the university, the fund will invest up to $500,000 per Rice-affiliated company.

To be considered eligible for funds, companies must use intellectual property licensed by the university or be led or founded by alumni.

One Giant Leap will draw on support and mentorship from Rice’s pool of 60,000 alumni and aims to create educational opportunities within the investment phases, work with graduate and undergraduate venture students, explore the scaling and commercialization of their ideas, and help investigate all the facets of venture capital.

“Rice alumni bring an extraordinary depth of experience as entrepreneurs, investors and industry leaders, and One Giant Leap creates new ways to put that expertise to work for the next generation of Rice innovators,” Stephen Bayer, vice president for development and alumni relations, said in a news release. “It strengthens the connection between our alumni and the university while giving them meaningful opportunities to mentor, advise and support Rice-affiliated companies as they grow.”

The fund held its first close in August and made its first investment into Rice brain health spinout Motif Neurotech. Led by Rice faculty member Jacob Robinson, Motif is working to commercialize a minimally invasive neurostimulator that targets treatment-resistant depression. In May, the FDA approved the company to move forward with its first clinical trial.

“Research produces breakthrough technologies and our academic environment forms outstanding entrepreneurs,” said Adrian Trömel, the fund’s managing director, a Rice alumnus and a startup founder who also serves as Rice’s interim chief innovation officer.

One Giant Leap joins the already long list of Rice-led programs that foster innovation, including the Liu Idea Labs for Innovation and Entrepreneurship’s Innovation Fellows and Summer Venture Studio, the Rice Alliance’s Business Plan Competition, the Ion District, Woodside Rice Decarbonization Accelerator, Rice Nexus, the Biotech Launchpad and RBL Ventures and its upcoming 200,000 square-foot research lab the Arc.

“With One Giant Leap, I am excited that we are creating a unique structure that brings together traditional investment and philanthropic participation to invest in and help catalyze our startups, engage the deep expertise within the Rice ecosystem and transform those strengths into real-world impact,” Trömel added in the release.

New statewide plan aims to eliminate cervical cancer in Texas by 2032

fighting cancer

MD Anderson, on behalf of a coalition of health systems, has announced a new plan to eliminate cervical cancer in Texas.

The five-year Texas Lone Star Cervical Cancer Elimination Plan was launched during the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT) 2026 Innovations Conference in Galveston this month.

The plan focuses on three major pillars with goals to be achieved by 2032:

  • HPV vaccination: Increase the percentage of Texas boys and girls up to date on human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination by age 15 from 50.5 percent to 80 percent
  • Cervical cancer screening: Raise the share of Texas women up to date on cervical cancer screening from 64 percent to 80 percent
  • Timely follow-up, diagnosis and treatment: Ensure 80 percent of women receive diagnostic follow-up and treatment when needed through community outreach, patient navigation, provider training and survivorship support

Overall, the coalition wants to see fewer than four new cases of cervical cancer annually per 100,000 Texas women by 2032, according to a news release from MD Anderson. Currently, Texas has an incidence rate of 9.5 women per 100,000 diagnosed with cervical cancer, compared with 7.5 women per 100,000 nationally.

“Texas has the tools to prevent nearly every case of cervical cancer, but tools can save lives only when people can utilize them,” Dr. Ernest Hawk, vice president and division head of Cancer Prevention and Population Sciences at MD Anderson, said in the release. “The Lone Star Cervical Cancer Elimination Plan gives us a shared roadmap to vaccinate more of our children, screen more of our women and make sure every abnormal result leads to care. With innovations like HPV self-collection and the commitment of partners across the state, elimination is within reach.”

About 40 other hospitals, health care organizations and companies join MD Anderson in the coalition that launched the Lonestar Plan. Those based in Houston include Houston Methodist, Rice University, UTHealth Houston, Texas Children's Hospital, Houston Health Department and others.

The CPRIT also announced its Texans Conquer Cancer Awards and its CPRIT Champion awards during the Innovations Conference this week. Several are based in Houston, including:

  • Zhiqiang An, co-founder of CrossBridge Bio, Director of the Texas Therapeutics Institute, and Vice President of Drug Discovery at the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston
  • Dr. Abbey Berenson, Director of the UTMB Center for Interdisciplinary Research in Women's Health Care
  • Dr. Michael Taylor, Chair of Pediatric Neuro-Oncology at Texas Children's Cancer and Hematology Center and Director of Texas Children's Pediatric Brain Tumor Research Program

To date, the CPRIT has awarded more than $4.2 billion in grants to fight cancer in the state. Over the summer, it awarded four $2 million grants to institutions in Houston and Bryan for the creation or expansion of “core” cancer research facilities.

Texas Medical Center Innovation recently announced that its $2 million grant would renew its Accelerator for Cancer Therapeutics for five years. Read more from TMCi about the renewal here.

Announcing the 2026 Houston Innovation Awards finalists

Inspirational Innovators

InnovationMap is proud to reveal the finalists for the 2026 Houston Innovation Awards.

The sixth annual Houston Innovation Awards program returns in an all-digital format this fall to honor the best of Houston's innovation ecosystem, including startups, entrepreneurs, mentors, and more.

Finalists were determined by our esteemed panel of judges, comprised of past award winners and InnovationMap editorial leadership.

The panel reviewed applications across 10 prestigious categories to determine our finalists. They will select the winner for each category, except for Startup of the Year, which will be chosen by the public via online voting launching later this month.

We will announce the honoree of our annual Trailblazer Award in the coming weeks, then stay tuned as we unveil all of this year's winners on InnovationMap.com in mid-November.

Get to know our finalists in more detail through editorial spotlights leading up to the winner announcement. Without further ado, here are the 2026 Houston Innovation Awards finalists:

Minority-founded Business

Honoring an innovative startup founded or co-founded by BIPOC or LGBTQ+ representation:

  • AI Made Fun
  • Deep Anchor Solutions
  • HEXAspec
  • Prana Surgical
  • Torres Orbital Mining Inc.

Female-founded Business

Honoring an innovative startup founded or co-founded by a woman:

  • Adair
  • ARIX Technologies
  • Bairitone Health
  • FlowCellutions
  • ParaDocs Health

Energy Transition Business

Honoring an innovative startup providing a solution within renewables, climatetech, clean energy, alternative materials, circular economy and beyond:

  • Capwell Services
  • FlowCellutions
  • Hertha Metals
  • Mars Materials
  • Solidec

Health Tech Business

Honoring an innovative startup within the health and medical technology sectors:

  • Bairitone Health
  • InformAI Inc.
  • Prana Surgical
  • Skybound MedTech

Deep Tech Business

Honoring an innovative startup providing technology solutions based on substantial scientific or engineering challenges, including those in the AI, robotics and space sectors:

  • Casimir
  • Focis AI
  • Machine Saver Inc.
  • Square Robot
  • Venus Aerospace

Startup of the Year (People's Choice)

Honoring a startup celebrating a recent milestone or success. The winner will be selected by the community via an online voting experience:

  • Fluxworks
  • IronLattice
  • Lumino
  • Progress Report
  • Rosarium Health
  • Thread
  • TokenRoster

Scaleup of the Year

Honoring an innovative later-stage startup that's recently reached a significant milestone in company growth:

  • Erock
  • Hertha Metals
  • Venus Aerospace

Incubator/Accelerator of the Year

Honoring a local incubator or accelerator that is championing and fueling the growth of Houston startups:

  • Activate
  • Impact Hub Houston
  • MarMo Innovation

Mentor of the Year

Honoring an individual who dedicates their time and expertise to guide and support budding entrepreneurs:

  • Al Danto, Rice University
  • Eric Rubenstein, New Climate Ventures
  • Jeremy Pitts, Activate
  • Joe Alapat, Liongard
  • Kyle Judah, Rice University's Liu Idea Lab for Innovation & Entrepreneurship
  • Rachel Bickham, Bickham Services Unlimited LLC

Trailblazer Recipient

  • To be announced