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

Houston shines among top 10 tech metros in the South, study says

Tops in Tech

A study analyzing top U.S. locales for the tech industry ranked Houston the No. 9 best tech hub in the South.

The report by commercial real estate platform CommercialCafe examined the top 20 Southern metros across nine metrics, such as the growth rates of tech establishments and employment, median tech earnings, a quality of life index, and more.

Like other Texas metros, the study attributes Houston's tech powerhouse status to its growing presence of major tech companies. However, Houston leads the nation with the highest number of patents granted between 2020 and 2024.

"The second-largest metro by population in the South, Houston led the region with an impressive 8,691 tech patent grants in the last five years," the report said. "Once synonymous with oil, Houston is increasingly making its mark as a cleantech hub — and patents reflect this shift."

Houston also experienced an impressive 14 percent growth in tech establishments, with nearly 500 new tech companies moving to the metro. An impressive 32 percent job growth rate also accompanied this change, with over 30,500 tech jobs added between 2019 and 2023.

Here's how Houston stacked up across the remaining five rankings:
  • No. 11 – Tech establishment density
  • No. 15 – Median tech earnings
  • No. 19 – Median tech earnings growth
  • No. 20 – Tech job density
  • No. 20 – Quality of life index

In a separate 2024 report, Houston was the No. 22 best tech city nationwide, showing that the city is certainly making efforts to improve its friendliness toward the tech industry in 2025.

Other top Texas tech hubs in the South
The only other Texas metros to earn spots in the report were Austin (No. 1) and Dallas-Fort Worth (No. 4). Most notably, CommercialCafe says Austin saw a 25 percent increase in tech company density from 2019 to 2023, which is the third-highest growth rate out of all 20 metros.

"Moreover, the metro’s tech scene thrives on a diverse range of segments, including AI and green energy (bolstered by the University of Texas), as well as globally recognized events like [South by Southwest]," the report says. "Thus, with tech companies accounting for more than half of all office leasing activity in 2024, Austin remains a magnet for innovation, talent and investment."

Dallas, on the other hand, has a far greater diversity when it comes to its tech sector and its thriving economic opportunities.

"Not to be outdone, Dallas-Fort Worth moved up from sixth to fourth in this year’s rankings, driven by a 25.9 percent growth in tech company presence — the second-highest increase among the top 20 metros," the report said. "For instance, companies like iRely (which relocated to Irving, Texas) and Diversified (now in Plano, Texas) have joined homegrown successes, such as StackPath and Bestow."

The top 10 best tech metros in the South are:

  • No. 1 – Washington, D.C.
  • No. 2 – Austin, Texas
  • No. 3 – Raleigh, North Carolina
  • No. 4 – Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas
  • No. 5 – Huntsville, Alabama
  • No. 6 – Baltimore, Maryland
  • No. 7 – Durham, North Carolina
  • No. 8 – Atlanta, Georgia
  • No. 9 – Houston, Texas
  • No. 10 – Charlotte, North Carolina
---

This story originally appeared on our sister site, CultureMap.com.

Houston startup, researchers awarded millions to develop Brain Mesh implant

brain health

Houston startup Motif Neurotech and several Rice research groups have been selected by the United Kingdom's Advanced Research + Invention Agency (ARIA) to participate in its inaugural Precision Neurotechnologies program. The program aims to develop advanced brain-interfacing technologies for cognitive and psychiatric conditions.

ARIA will invest $84.2 million over four years in projects that “explore and unlock new methods to interface with the human brain at the circuit level,” according to a news release.

Three of the four Rice labs will collaborate with Houston health tech startup Motif Neurotech to develop Brain Mesh, which is a distributed network of minimally invasive implants that can stimulate neural circuits and stream neural data in real time. The project has been awarded approximately $5.9 million.

Motif Neurotech was spun out of the Rice lab of Jacob Robinson, a professor of electrical and computer engineering and bioengineering and CEO of Motif Neurotech. It will be developed in collaboration with U.K.-based startup MintNeuro, which will help develop custom integrated circuits that will help to miniaturize the implants, according to a separate release.

Robinson will lead the system and network integration and encapsulation efforts for Mesh Points implants. According to Rice, these implants, about the size of a grain of rice, will track and modulate brain states and be embedded in the skull through relatively low-risk surgery.

The Rice lab of Valentin Dragoi, professor of electrical and computer engineering at Rice and the Rosemary and Daniel J. Harrison III Presidential Distinguished Chair in Neuroprosthetics at Houston Methodist, will conduct non-human primate experimental models for Brain Mesh. Kaiyuan Yang, associate professor of electrical and computer engineering who leads the Secure and Intelligent Micro-Systems Lab at Rice, will work on power and data pipeline development to enable the functional miniaturization of the Mesh Points.

“Current neurotechnologies are limited in scale, specificity and compatibility with human use,” Robinson said in a news release. “The Brain Mesh will be a precise, scalable system for brain-state monitoring and modulation across entire neural circuits designed explicitly for human translation. Our team brings together a key set of capabilities and the expertise to not only work through the technical and scientific challenges but also to steward this technology into clinical trials and beyond.”

The fourth Rice lab, led by assistant professor of electrical and computer engineering Jerzy Szablowski, will collaborate with researchers from three universities and two industry partners to develop closed-loop, self-regulating gene therapy for dysfunctional brain circuits. The team is backed by an award of approximately $2.3 million.

“Our goal is to develop a method for returning neural circuits involved in neuropsychiatric illnesses such as epilepsy, schizophrenia, dementia, etc. to normal function and maybe even make them more resilient,” Szablowski said in a news release.

Neurological disorders in the U.K. have a roughly $5.4 billion economic burden, and some estimates run as high as $800 billion annually in terms of economic disruptions in the U.S. These conditions are the leading cause of illness and disability with over one in three people impacted according to the World Health Organization.

Electricity startup expands to Houston with promise of backup battery power

Power Up

An Austin startup that sells electricity and couples it with backup power has entered the Houston market.

Base Power, which claims to be the first and only electricity provider to offer a backup battery, now serves the Houston-area territory served by Houston-based CenterPoint Energy. No solar equipment is required for Base Power’s backup batteries.

The company is initially serving customers in the Cy-Fair, Spring, Cinco Ranch and Mission Bend communities, and will expand to other Houston-area places in the future.

Base Power already serves customers in the Austin and Dallas-Fort Worth markets.

The company says it provides “a cost-effective alternative to generators and solar-battery systems in an increasingly unreliable power grid.”

“Houston represents one of the largest home backup markets in the world, largely due to dramatic weather events that strain the power grid,” says Base Power co-founder and CEO Zach Dell, son of tech billionaire Michael Dell. “We’re eager to provide an accessible energy service that delivers affordable, reliable power to Houston homeowners.”

After paying a $495 or $995 fee that covers installation and permitting, and a $16- or $29-per-month membership fee, Base Power customers gain access to a backup battery and competitive energy rates, the company says. The startup is waiving the $495 setup fee for the first 500 Houston-area homeowners who sign up and make a refundable deposit.

With the Base Power backup package, electricity costs 14.3 cents per kilowatt-hour, which includes Base Power’s 8.5 cents per kilowatt-hour charge and rates charged by CenterPoint. The average electric customer in Houston pays 13 cents per kilowatt-hour, according to EnergySage.

“Base Power is built to solve a problem that so many Texans face: consistent power,” says Justin Lopas, co-founder and chief operating officer of Base Power and a former SpaceX engineer. “Houstonians can now redefine how they power their homes, while also improving the existing power grid.”

Founded in 2023, Base Power has attracted funding from investors such as Thrive Capital, Valor Equity Partners, Altimeter Capital, Trust Ventures, and Terrain. Zach Dell was previously an associate on the investment team at Thrive Capital.

---

This story originally appeared on our sister site, EnergyCapitalHTX.com.

View All Listings