The Stanford Medical Scholars Research Programs provide opportunities for students to carry out independent research in any area of the medical disciplines. The programs are designed to foster an appreciation and proficiency for the investigative/scholarly process, including study design, hands-on collection of data, interpretation of results, and presentation of work accomplished in oral and written form.
The Committee considers research experience a valuable part of medical education, and considers proposals from that viewpoint. Research projects may be based in a variety of settings including the laboratory, field, clinic, or community. Proposals that are not investigational, are primarily for observation or assistance to others, or describe altruistic public service projects, however worthwhile, are not eligible for this student research support.
Please note: You must click Save at each step. Here is the User Guide with step-by-step instructions.
Selection of Project and Mentor
LOOK for a project that you have a passion for in a setting where you will have strong mentor support (Note: projects off-site -traveling or community- require a Stanford faculty advisor AND an on site professional advisor).
The key elements for an optimal research experience are first to identify a field and problem that you believe is interesting and important, and second to identify a research setting where the techniques/resources you will need are already established, and there are people who have the time and interest to teach you those techniques. The second task is often more challenging but goes hand-in-hand with the first. An excellent starting point is to survey the Community Academic Profiles (CAPs) on the Medical School web site for projects that you find interesting, then meet individually with prospective advisors and members of their laboratory or research team. At least one faculty advisor must be a member of the Academic Council, Medical Center Line, or Senior Academic staff.
One of the most important predictors for a successful project is that it be carried out in a setting that has an active and ongoing program in the area you wish to investigate, which can often but not always be determined by a track record in terms of both publications and prior funding. In addition, you should also consider whether your prospective advisor and/or their team will have the time and energy to work with you on an individual basis. It can be hard to find all of these characteristics together, and you may need to strike an appropriate balance.
Note that while your project will usually fit into the faculty advisor's ongoing research program, creativity and innovation are an important part of the research process, and your project should have the potential for you to make a meaningful intellectual contribution. In particular, your project should not be limited to running an assay or entering data based on a chart review.
Some students request to attend the weekly research/clinical group meetings to get an idea of the faculty and support makeup of the setting. Other students volunteer to work with the faculty prior to applying.
PLAN by preparing to meet proposal deadlines.
This means: drafting your proposal, reviewing it with your research mentor, and -if desired- having it read by your Scholarly Concentration. Your SC Director can recommend a second reviewer in your SC area.
To receive a review within the SC you think your research falls, proposals must be given to the SC Director no less than one month before the deadline (ex. SC review by 9/1/16 for the 10/12/16 deadline).
Deadline 10/9/19 5:59pm for research to begin Winter Quarter 2019-20
Deadline 1/15/20 5:59pm for research to begin Spring Quarter 2019-20
Deadline 4/8/20 5:59pm for research to begin Summer Quarter 2019-20
Deadline 7/8/20 5:59pm for research to begin Autumn Quarter 2020-21
NOTE: Anyone intending to do research off the Stanford/SoM campus (i.e. Traveling Scholars) should apply two quarters before intended travel quarter.
Applications must be submitted in MedScholars Online by the appropriate application deadline listed above.
Proposals are reviewed by Stanford faculty, typically faculty with at least a general familiarity with the area in which the research is to be conducted. Proposals should be constructed to be accessible to individuals with training and expertise related to the area of inquiry, but should not assume that reviewers will necessarily be content experts in the precise topic being addressed.
The faculty research advisor or mentor should be an important resource for advice at all levels of your proposal preparation. Mentor advice can be particularly valuable for identifying clear research aims, developing appropriate ways of framing the background, and structuring strong research designs and methodologies. Mentors can also typically be helpful for other questions and parts of the proposal as well. At a minimum, students and mentors should meet at the beginning of proposal development to outline the project aims and approaches, and as the proposal nears completion. Mentors are required to review and approve the proposal before it can be submitted. Also see “Advisor Responsibilities.”
In addition to mentor consultation, it is often advisable to consult with the Director of the Scholarly Concentration area most aligned with the project. SC area directors are often closely involved in the review of proposals and, in many cases, are able to offer advice about project development. If you seek input from an SC area director, it is advisable to do so well in advance of the submission deadline; usually a month in advance is most useful.
Length maximums are specified for each section of the proposal below. There is not a set minimum length for proposals. The best proposals are focused and to the point, concisely conveying the necessary information. We have seen outstanding proposals where the main sections are 5-6 pages in length, and once in a while even shorter.
For more tips on writing grant proposals in general:
All proposals must have a title. The title should clearly and succinctly convey the content of the research being proposed. To as great an extent as possible, the title should use plain language and be accessible to a wide range of readers.
Your proposal should contain the following six sections below.
If you are proposing a project that continues a previously funded project (see “continuing a project” below), include at the beginning a “continuation summary” of up to one page that includes the rationale for a continuation project, the status of the originally proposed research, the specific aims of the work contained in this proposal and their relationship to the aims of the previous project. After the continuation summary, include a complete proposal as described in this section. Continuation applications may re-use sections of the previous proposal. If revisions to the proposal are not extensive (and if they are extensive, please consult with the MedScholars office since the situation may not be appropriate for a continuation proposal), please highlight or otherwise make clear where there are changes to the proposal. Then continue with the remaining proposal sections.
I. Research Experience: List all your previous research experiences, including any funded MedScholars projects (include: Project Title, Mentor, FTEQ(s), date of approval, and date of completion if applicable). You can view an example layout on the Research experience page.
II. Abstract: The proposal must be summarized in a 250-word statement concisely describing the aims of the proposed research, the methodology to be used, and the potential impact that the results of the proposed research could have on the research field(s) involved. As much as possible, the abstract should be accessibly to a wide range of readers.
III. Project Goal: Describe what you hope to learn from undertaking this project. The goal is a brief overall statement of what you hope the project will achieve. The goal is typically expressed in up to one paragraph.
IV. Text: The text of your proposal should include the following labeled sub-sections.
A. Specific Aims (up to 1 page): Enumerate clear and distinct research aims or objectives for the project. Each aim should be framed in one or a few simple declarative sentences. The aims are more specific statements of steps on the way to meeting the overall project goal. In some cases, it may be useful to structure the aims around the hypotheses to be tested. Some context for the aims may be provided in this section, but in general it should be brief and other sections should contain the majority of the project description. In most cases, MedScholars projects have between 1 and 3 specific aims.
Considering the “SMART” framework can be valuable in framing the project aims. It is usually best when aims are S.M.A.R.T.:
- Time constrained
B. Background and Significance (see page guidance below): Summarize the state/quality of the academic research in your area of inquiry; provide the rationale or justification for your project’s research question (i.e., how this project will advance knowledge in fields related to the research question). Cite relevant literature (up to 2 pages).
If this project builds on a previously funded MedScholars project, please note how this project relates to the previous proposal, updating the committee on the progress of the previous project (up to 1 additional page).
C. Project/Experimental Design and Methods (up to 4 pages): For each specific aims, briefly state the aim and then explain in more detail how each will be accomplished. Proposals need to provide sufficient detail to portray a clear understanding of the methodology, but need not convey details at the finest levels. For example, in a laboratory based project, you do not need to list every buffer that will be used but you need to explain how each assay works. State the possible outcomes of each investigation/experiment and how you will interpret these outcomes with regard to your goals/hypothesis. Consider alternative interpretations and possible pitfalls. A critical part of the proposal is to explain how the studies you propose will address the goals and aims of the project and the hypotheses you wish to test.
For all projects, be specific and comprehensive in describing how your data will be gathered and analyzed. It is frequently helpful to have biostatistical and epidemiologic consultation during the writing your proposal. It is often unsatisfactory if there are aims of the project that clearly call for data analysis but the analyses are not specified, or the proposal merely states that consultation will be obtained later. Explain how the design of your study (retrospective, case-control, etc.) impacts the strength of the conclusions that can be drawn, and describe the study participants, data collection, and statistical tests you will apply to determine the confidence with which your hypothesis can be accepted.
D. Relevance to Medicine (one paragraph): Identify the relationship of your research to progress in the field of medicine.
- If you are proposing community-based research, please provide a statement of the public health/community context for the problem or issue to be addressed. Provide specifics on the research partner organization you will be working with, the relevance of the project to the partner organization, and how its interests and needs are met through the research project. Provide background on why and how the partnership was developed and established. Identify how your project’s results will be disseminated to the community partner and (if appropriate) the wider community. (up to 1 additional page).
- If your project involves being away from the Stanford/SoM campus, please provide an explanation of why this experience offers you a unique opportunity and why the same research cannot be conducted at Stanford. Also include your proposed travel budget - not to exceed $2,500 (up to 1 additional page). In order to qualify for travel funds associated with international and domestic travel, students must be on the ground at the research site for 6 weeks. In exceptional circumstances, students may petition for 4 weeks at the research site. Travel must occur during the active weeks of the academic quarter.
E. Timeline: Identify important milestones that the project will accomplish for each quarter of funding. Typically, projects specify two to four milestones per quarter. These will be used for monitoring of project progress.
F. Bibliography: List full citations (all authors).
G. Appendix if applicable. In particular, if your project includes the use of questionnaires, attach the questionnaires.
V. Compliance(s) application: In order to submit your application, all students must have completed CITI Group 9, responsible/ethical conduct of research. Either a documentation of approval or a copy of completed applications for approval of all required clearances (working with animal or human subjects, biohazardous or radioactive materials) must be turned in with your proposal. In some cases, your advisor will already have approvals in place for a larger project, but this is often not sufficient for the MedScholars application since MedScholars requires approval specifically including your name and project. If your advisor has general approvals that do not specifically list you and your project, a change must be applied to add your name and project to the formal approval and this application must be submitted with your MedScholars application.
All required clearances must be obtained (not just applied for) before the project can begin and before MedScholars funds can be disbursed. Note that approval processes can take 5 weeks or more, so planning ahead is necessary. In cases where all compliance approvals are not in place by the second week of the quarter in which the project is to begin, the project will become ineligible for MedScholars funding. In this case, at the request of the student and with approval of the MedScholars program, projects can typically be deferred until the following quarter.
VI. Advisor Letter (to be attached to the file by your Stanford research advisor): All Medical Scholars Research fellowships must have a Stanford faculty member advisor and the application must include a letter of support from this advisor. For Traveling MedScholars, a letter from the on-site advisor is also required (submitted as an attachment to the MedScholars Program Coordinator. A primary advisor is one that is directly supervising the student. NOTE: A strong letter from the faculty advisor is an important part of the application.
SUBMIT the completed application in an attachment (.pdf or .doc preferred) in the order outlined above on the MedScholars Online application system.
Proposals are submitted in MedScholars Online (MEP-MSR) and are checked for completion of application materials (MedScholars Program Coordinator).
Central administration assigns and sends each proposal to the SC that best fits content.
Each SC Director assigns Faculty Reviewer for each of their proposals and emails student the name of their Faculty Interviewer.
Students are contacted to set up a time for an interview and presentation to panel.
Following all interviews, SC committee meets to decide on Proposal ranking (approximately one month after the proposal deadline).
SC Directors bring their rankings to quarterly review meeting of the MedScholars Review Committee (all SC Directors).
Based on the rankings submitted by each SC Director, the committee makes the decision of "Approved," "Resubmit," or "Not Approved" on all proposals.
- Student is notified of the final decision within 10 business days of the MedScholars Review Committee meeting.
Notification of Results
All students (and faculty research advisors) are informed of the Committee decision along with available feed back from the review process.
Students approved will be notified if there are any outstanding required compliances. When all required compliances are satisfied and the student signs up for units under Medical Scholars 370 in the department of their faculty research advisor, funding is released.
In cases where all compliance approvals/registration are not in place by the second week of the quarter in which the project is to begin, the project will become ineligible for MedScholars funding. In this case, at the request of the student and with approval of the MedScholars program, projects can typically be deferred until the following quarter.
Following the completion of your application, please thoroughly review compliance information with your research advisor and submit appropriate documents approving any research involving humans or animals, or the handling of radioactive isotopes, combining DNA, or hazardous biomaterials.
WE CANNOT RELEASE YOUR FUNDING UNTIL THE APPROPRIATE COMPLIANCE INFORMATION IS RECEIVED. This means that your name must be on a protocol form generated and approved by the appropriate committee (human subject, animal care, etc.). It is best to begin this process as early as possible so that the approval documentation can be turned in with the proposal.
Stanford University and state and federal law require that any person engaging in research receive appropriate approvals if their research involves humans or animals, or if they will be handling radioactive isotopes, recombinant DNA, or hazardous biomaterials. Note that except for radioactive isotope training, all approvals are project-specific. Even though your advisor may be cleared for his or her research, you must receive approval for your project or be cross-referenced on his protocol by name. Below is basic information to help you determine what is required and how to obtain approvals. If you have specific questions, you are encouraged to contact the coordinators listed below. You will find them helpful and knowledgeable. Generally, compliance panels meet monthly.
You must file for compliance clearance by the Medical Scholars application deadline. Approval of protocols or certification of training must be received prior to releasing funding. In cases where all compliance approvals are not in place by the second week of the quarter in which the project is to begin, the project will become ineligible for MedScholars funding. In this case, at the request of the student and with approval of the MedScholars program, projects can typically be deferred until the following quarter.
Things to note:
- If/when you publish, make sure your work matches your protocol!
- Changes in the scope of your project need to be approved by IRB/APLAC.
- If you and your mentor agree you'll need compliances from IRB/APLAC, you can work ahead by taking the CITI courses required BEFORE you apply for your MS funding (or during the review process).
- Human Subjects Site
- Stem Cell Research Oversight Site
Stanford University and state and federal law requires research involving human subjects be reviewed by the IRB (Institutional Review Board).
Under federal regulations Research is defined as systematic investigation, including research development, testing and evaluation, designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge. A human subject is defined as "living individual(s) about whom an investigator conducting research obtains: (1) data through intervention or interaction with the individual; or (2) identifiable private information."
A copy of the IRB Certification of Approval Letter, Certification of Exemption, or Notice of Human Subjects Determination is required to release Medical Scholars Funding.
My MS project may not meet the definition of “human subject research,” so am I exempt?
If you believe that your study might NOT meet the definition of human subject research, you should complete a Determination of Human Subject Research - Application to the IRB. This application form, guidance, and a self-help human subject research determination flow chart are available at Do I need an IRB Submission? on the For Researchers page.
If you have any questions about whether your project requires IRB review submit a Determination of Human Subject Research - Application to the IRB, or contact IRB Education (IRBeducation@stanford.edu, 724-7141).
My MS project DOES meet the definition of Human Subject research. What now?
You must either submit a new protocol application to the IRB or have your name added to an existing human subject protocol. The IRB uses an electronic application system called eProtocol. Instructions and information for using the eProtocol system are available at: How do I use the eProtocol system?under FAQs on the navigation bar.
- Create a new protocol application here. A faculty sponsor must be listed on your protocol application (under “Academic Sponsor”).
- IRB approval is contingent on each person involved in the project, including faculty sponsors, completing the Human Subjects (CITI) training. CITI training is required to be completed every two years. Information and the link to the CITI training are available from the human subject website underCITI Tutorial on the navigation bar.
My Research Advisor is already cleared for his/her research. Do I need to do anything special for IRB approval?
Even though your advisor may be cleared for his or her research, if your project does not relate to your advisor’s approved research, you need to submit a protocol and obtain separate IRB approval for your project. If your research is part of or consistent with the research activities in your advisor’s approved protocol, then your advisor can add you to his or her protocol.
Below is basic information to help you determine what is required and how to obtain approvals.
- If your research is not related to or does not fall under your advisor’s approved research, you must submit a new protocol application (via the eProtocol system) for IRB approval of your project. Go hereto create a new protocol application. A faculty sponsor must be listed on your protocol application (under "Academic Sponsor"). Instructions and information for using the eProtocol system are available here.
- If you are requesting to be added to an already approved study, please have the current Protocol Director submit a Modification to add your name and funding to the protocol. If your role in the study introduces new procedures or activities to the project, these changes should also be included in the modification, but they must be related to work that is already taking place on the study.
If you have any questions about whether your project falls under an existing approved IRB protocol contact IRB Education (IRBeducation@stanford.edu, 724-7141).
I’m not sure what kind of protocol application or form I should submit.
In order to create an eProtocol application form for submission to the IRB you will need to pick a protocol type (medical or nonmedical) and a review category (regular, expedited, chart review, or exempt). Generally, if you are enrolled in the School of Medicine, or doing your research at SHC, the VA or LPCH, you should submit a medical eProtocol application form, whether or not your protocol involves medical intervention, drugs, or devices.
Regarding the protocol review type, all research is subject to regular review unless it qualifies for expedited or exempt review. There are seven (7) categories expedited review categories and six (6) exempt review categories. Generally, the expedited and exempt review categories describe research that present no more than minimal risk to participants (e.g., simple blood drawing, retrospective review of existing data or specimens and survey and questionnaire studies).
See FAQs on “Submitting a Protocol”, including Review Type: What is it and why do I need to know? which explains the expedited (including chart review), and exempt review categories.
Contact IRB Education (IRBeducation@stanford.edu, 724-7141) if you have any questions about the appropriate protocol review category for your research.
Who reviews the protocols? How long does it take?
Protocols are reviewed by both IRB staff and the IRB members. Comments or questions the IRB may have about your project will be sent for your response prior to a meeting date assigned to your protocol. All protocols subject to Regular review must be presented and voted on at a monthly convened meeting. It generally takes between 4-6 weeks from submission to approval of a protocol subject to regular review. For protocols subject to expedited and exempt review it takes from 2-3 weeks from submission to approval. Time for approval may be delayed if the initial protocol submission is incomplete and has to be returned for additional information.
Can I get underway with my research while I await word about my IRB?
Under no circumstances may you begin your research until you have been notified of IRB approval (or certification of exemption for protocols subject to exempt review) or that your project does not require IRB submission (determination of non-human subject research).
1. I have a group of students who will be submitting human research protocols to the IRB. What resources are available?
To request classes and presentations geared towards your needs, or to request individual appointments, please contact IRBeducation@stanford.edu. For information on the eProtocol system, review categories, guidance documents, and information go here.
2. What is the Institutional Review Board (IRB)?
The IRB is the committee that reviews and approves protocols that involve human subject research. Federal regulations require that all protocols which involve human subjects be reviewed to ensure the protection of the participants. The IRB membership represents a variety of backgrounds, training and experience. At least one IRB member must be unaffiliated with the University (a community representative) and at least one member must be a non-scientist.
3. I want to submit a new protocol application. When is the next due date?
The next due date for protocol submissions can be found on the Human Subjects Research website:What are the panel meeting dates & deadlines? Generally, new protocol applications submitted for regular review by the first of one month will be reviewed in the following month. That is, if you submit a protocol application by July 1, it will be reviewed sometime in the month of August. Protocols are reviewed in the order that they are received by the IRB.
4. How long does it take for a protocol to be approved?
It generally takes between 4-6 weeks from submission to approval of a protocol subject to Regular review. For protocols subject to Expedited and Exempt review it takes from 2-3 weeks from submission to approval. Time for approval may be delayed if the initial protocol submission is incomplete and has to be returned for additional information.
5. I am trying to log on to the CITI Training and it is not recognizing my SUNet ID. What’s wrong?
The CITI system is not linked to the Stanford system. You will need to select/create a login and password to register for the training and before the system will recognize you as a return user. For more information on CITI and links to the training and completion data base go the Human Subjects Research website under CITI Required Tutorial from the navigation bar.
6. Can I make changes to my approved protocol?
If you would like to make changes to a protocol that has already been approved, you will need to submit a Modification and wait for IRB approval before implementing the change.
7. How can I avoid protocol processing delays?
In the eProtocol application form, make sure that all email addresses are valid. Without valid email addresses the IRB will not be able to effectively communicate with you. Also, remember to include a faculty/academic sponsor in the personnel section of the application. Lastly, remember to attach all necessary documents in the consent, assent, and HIPAA sections, and in the last section of the application (e.g., advertisements, surveys, questionnaires, Investigator's Brochure, Sponsor's protocol, etc.)
8. I am planning on applying for a medical scholars to write a book. Will I have to submit an IRB proposal?
Students planning a writing project should run the idea by the appropriate human subjects committee (an email is fine) and ask if they need to submit a protocol. In the event a protocol is not necessary, the student should forward the e-mail the to the Med Scholars program, as well as save the email response.
9. I have a project that needs multipurpose submissions to Human Subjects, Animal Care, and Hazardous Agents. Should I apply for all three protocols separately?
If your proposal involves more and one area of research (such as human subjects, animals, and/or stem cells) you will need to submit separate applications to the oversight committees of each discipline for review and approval. See the following:
- Please click here for the Human Subjects Research Site
- Please click here for the Animal Care and Use Site
- Please click here for the Stem Cell Research Oversight Site
Animal Care and Use
I’m going to be working with animal subjects during my MS fellowship.
Here are the items you need to do:
Enroll in the general Animal Care and Use Training Seminar. You can see information about this at: http://med.stanford.edu/compmed/education/vet.html#ACU.
You may need assistance from your advisor’s administrative or laboratory manager to enroll in this seminar.
Your name and description of qualifications or training plan, and your Medical Scholars proposal need to be added to the relevant currently approved protocol.* Ask your PI to have your name and your Medical Scholars proposal added to the protocol via a revision. A revision can be submitted to the protocol as follows: go to eProtocol, open the currently approved protocol, select revision form, then 1) add personnel 2), add funding source, (add the Medical Scholars proposal under fother funding.) contact Stephanie Mar.
When adding your name to the protocol, there is a box underneath where the PI describes what training you will have or have had with this specific animal model. Once your name has been added and approved, you can view the protocol on line. Make sure you review it carefully and any guidelines that are attached to it. (eProtocol can be accessed at https://eprotocol.stanford.edu/.
The Veterinary Service Center can also provide hands-on training in various techniques. The well-being of animals used in research is very important. You can contact the veterinary staff at 723-3876 and ask for training assistance to conduct the studies with animals on your advisor’s protocol. If Veterinary staff will provide training to you, please have this included in your personnel revision training description section.
The personnel and funding revision is submitted to the Stanford Administrative Panel on Laboratory Animal Care (APLAC). The APLAC will review the personnel and funding revision and may have questions or may approve.
The Medical Scholars Office has access to eProtocol so they will be able to view the approved protocol with your name and funding revision added to it.
You will also need to participate in the Lab. Animal Occupational Health Program (LAOHP). Contact Environmental Health and Safety, at 725-5308, for instructions.
Can I get underway with my research while I await word about my protocol approval?
All research and teaching activities involving live or dead vertebrate animals use must be reviewed and approved by the APLAC PRIOR to activity commencement. No animal work can be conducted, nor animals purchased, without a currently approved APLAC protocol.
You must fill out all relevant screens. If your eProtocol is incomplete, review delays will occur.
Who can I contact with questions?
Contact Valerie Fratus (650-723-4550) if you are using animals in your research. For questions concerning training and working with animal models, access to the animal facility, contact the Veterinary Service Center, 723-3876.
*Infrequently, there is a need to file a completely new animal studies protocol since either: the animal model has not yet been approved in a protocol, or the Medical Scholar plans to do animal studies outside of Stanford.
Relevant websites: http://labanimals.stanford.edu/ and http://med.stanford.edu/compmed/animal_care/support.html
Protocol deadline is the first of every month.
If there are problems with the eProtocol application:
Go to HelpSU.stanford.edu. Fill in the Problem Category as "Administrative Applications" and the Problem Type as "eProtocols - Lab Animals." Your request will be assessed to determine the nature of the problem. Some problems may take more time to resolve than others but someone will contact you as soon as possible.
Reminder: No animal work can be conducted, nor animals purchased, without a currently approved APLAC protocol.
Every lab handling radioactive materials has a license and a CRA number, which should be posted in the lab. A few labs on campus have been certified as "low activity source" labs, and are exempt from requiring special training of their staff. These labs carry the prefix of "LS" before their CRA number.
I will be doing my research in a lab that is designated as “low source,” what should I do to get my protocol approval in place?
If you are handling sources defined as "low activity", Health Physics will return a form to your advisor delineating the training requirements to provide you. A copy of this form must accompany your Med Scholars application.
I will be doing my research in a lab that is not designated as “low source,” what should I do about my approval?
If you are planning on handling radioactive materials in a lab not designated as "low source" (LS), your advisor must send a complete Statement of Training and Experience to Health Physics, Environmental Safety Facility, Stock Farm Road, Mail Code 8006 (or fax it to 723-0632). This form can be downloaded from the Environmental Health and Safety Website (http://www.stanford.edu/dept/EHS/prod/researchlab/radlaser/).
If you are handling sources in excess of those stipulated as "low activity", Health Physics will determine what, if any, training you will be required to take before being allowed to handle radioactive materials. If you have had a previous training and handled radioactive material in other institution you can take an open book test at Health Physics, if not you need to sit in the class to take RAD training. The maximum training is two four-hour sessions. After you have been trained, by taking the test or attending class, you will receive a form indicating you are "certified" to handle materials in the lab. If the panel does not require you to take further training, you must request a memo from the panel indicating that no further training is required. Either the memo from the panel indicating no training is required to release Medical Scholars funding, or you can use the certificate showing that you are cleared to use radioactive materials.
Who do I contact with any questions or where do I look for more information?
Contact Lance J. Phillips (650-725-1412) for more information.
For more information on general radiation safety, check out the on line safety manual (http://www.stanford.edu/dept/EHS/prod/researchlab/radlaser/manual/rad_safety_manual_2004.pdf). Don't worry that it's from 1997 - its principles are timeless (and it is reviewed frequently and updated when necessary)!
I will be working with biohazards during my research. What should I do about protocols?
For work involving agents categorized as biosafety level (BL) 2-4, these protocols must be reviewed and approved by the campus Administrative Panel on Biosafety (APB) prior to starting research. For more details, refer to the SU biosafety web site at: http://www.stanford.edu/dept/EHS/prod/researchlab/bio/
By the way!
Bloodborne Pathogen Training (EHS1600-Prog) and DOT: Shipping Dangerous Biological Goods (EHS-2700-WEB) are now available via Axess.
Check out the latest Biohazard Waste Disposal Guidelines Poster
Who should I contact with further questions?
Contact Ellyn Segal (650-725-1473) for more information.
The School of Medicine recognizes the sensitive nature of health and safety training and compliance when receiving a medical education or conducting research within a University setting. We are aware that practices and conditions vary, regulations and inspections intrude, liabilities startle, and opinions clash. Nevertheless, health and safety is everyone’s responsibility and all of us have roles to play.
We further acknowledge our obligation to furnish our students with a safe teaching and research environment. We have a responsibility to provide you with training, information, and resources that will enable you to undertake your education and research safely and compliantly. The School’s faculty continues this process by providing you with specific training related to the techniques, procedures, and equipment used in conjunction with your course work, clinical practice, and laboratory research.
What is my first step in getting approval to start my research that involves chemical hazards?
Please begin your participation by registering in the AXESS Learning page (STARS). Register for General Safety and Emergency Preparation (EHS-4200), Chemical Safety (EHS-1900), Biosafety (EHS-1500), and Compressed Gas Safety (EHS-2200).
To determine if you need to take additional Health and Safety Training, please go to the following link and go through the first two Training Advisors: http://www.stanford.edu/dept/EHS/prod/training/training_need.html
After your initial introduction to health and safety you will have a better understanding of your role in implementing good health and safety practices during your stay at Stanford. Please refer to the Health and Safety website at (http://med.stanford.edu/somsafety/) for additional information on the School’s Health and Safety Program and your role in contributing to a healthy, safe and compliant environment.
I’m not sure if my research procedures follow the policies. Where can I get more information?
If you are unsure of a procedure or not clear on the exact meaning of a policy, discuss it with your Principal Investigator. If you need further clarification, please call the School’s Health and Safety Programs Office at 723-0110 or send an email to: email@example.com.
I received my completion notice, now what?
Once you receive your completion notice in STARS, please forward a copy to the Medical Scholars Research Program. NOTE: It can take up to two weeks for STARS to reflect your completion of the course.
Stem Cell Research Oversight (SCRO)
The State of California has established guidelines for research involving human stem cells, including a requirement that each research project be reviewed by a Stem Cell Research Oversight panel. Stanford University has established the Stem Cell Research Oversight office to assist investigators with their stem cell research protocols. If your research involves human stem cells of any kind – including “adult” stem cells – please create and submit your research protocol in the new Stem Cell Research Oversight (SCRO) eProtocol web-based system: https://scroprotocol.stanford.edu/ Please find general information about Stem Cell Research Oversight at the SCRO Website: http://scro.stanford.edu/ The Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research Tracking (HESCRT) form – previously used for research protocol information – will now only track materials and equipment; if your laboratory conducts human embryonic stem cell research, complete this form by visiting the Office of Research Administration (ORA) website: http://ora.stanford.edu/hesc/
Sheena Bishop, IRB/ SCRO Coordination Manager: 650-725-4133, firstname.lastname@example.org