Skip to main content

Research Ethics Board Exemptions

Some research may be exempt from Research Ethics Board (REB) or departmental Research Ethics Committee (REC) review. 

The REB is the final authority on which projects require ethics review. The Board will not issue retroactive approvals.

It is important that researchers are familiar with what does or does not constitute ‘research which human participants’, and requires REB review, according to the TCPS 2. Incorrectly determining that a project does not require research ethics review, whether intentional or not, could be considered a breach of Laurier’s Policy for the Responsible Conduct of Research. 

Process

If your study clearly falls into one of the exemption categories on this page, you will not be required to submit the project for review by the REB or departmental REC. If you are unsure if your project fits into one of the exemption categories, email REB@wlu.ca. In some cases, you may still have to apply for Administrative Research (AdminResearch@wlu.ca) approval. 

  1. Check whether your project falls into an exemption category.
  2. Submit the REB Exemption Query Form to REB@wlu.ca. 
    • The REB will use the information you submit to determine whether your project requires review.

Determination of exemptions is based on institutional or regulatory criteria, including information provided in Chapter 2 of the TCPS 2 (2022), Articles 2.1-2.6. 

Various university policies, agreements and privacy legislation further regulate the use of data collected and maintained by Laurier. Researchers seeking access to such data should ensure compliance with these items. See Privacy and Access at Laurier for more information.

Exemption Categories

Your project or proposed activity does not require ethics review (REB or REC) if it clearly meets the below criteria for exemption:

Publicly Available Information

Research that relies exclusively on publicly available information is considered exempt, which includes information that is:

  • accessible to the public and appropriately protected by law (e.g., public archives or publicly available statistics such as Statistics Canada files), or
  • publicly accessible and the individuals to whom the information refers to have no reasonable expectation of privacy.

See TCPS2 Article 2.2 for guidance.

Observation Research

Research involving the observation of people in public places (e.g., stadium, planetarium, beach, museums, parks, or library) where:

  • There is no intervention staged by the research or direct interaction with the individuals or groups,
  • Those under observation have no reasonable expectation of privacy, and
  • Any dissemination of research results does not allow identification of specific individuals.

See TCPS2 Article 2.3 for guidance.

Secondary Use of Anonymous Information or Human Biological Materials

Research that relies exclusively on secondary use of anonymous information or human biological materials. For this research:

  • The process of data linkage or recording or dissemination of results does not generate identifiable information.
  • The secondary use of ‘anonymized’ or ‘coded’ information does require REB review. 
  • ‘Anonymous’ information is not the same as ‘coded’ or ‘anonymized’ information.
Here are the distinctions of the types of information as stated above: 
  • Anonymous information: the information never had identifiers associated with it (as would be the case with anonymous surveys). 
  • Coded information: direct identifiers are removed from the information and replaced with a code. Depending on access to the code, it may be possible to re-identify an individual.
  • Anonymized information: the information is irrevocably stripped of identifiers and a code is not kept for future re-linkage.
See TCPS2 Article 2.4 and Chapter 5, Section A, Key Concepts for guidance.

Note: See Identifiability of Information and Secondary Use of Data for further details.

Quality Assurance (QA), Quality Improvement (QI) and/or Program Evaluation Activities

These activities are undertaken to assess the performance of a program, service or an organization, and are typically used exclusively for management, assessment of improvement within an organization.

These activities do not typically fall within the scope of REB review, however, the determination of what constitutes QA/QI versus ‘research with human participants’ can be a difficult one to make.

Although QA/QI activities may use methods similar to those employed in research studies (surveys, interviews, focus groups, data analysis etc.), there are some characteristics of each that researchers can use to determine which category their projects may fall into. They are outlined below. 

  • Research: The primary purpose of a ‘research’ project is to extend a body of knowledge through a disciplined inquiry and/or systemic investigation.
    • The results of research projects are intended to be generalizable and benefit a broader community (which could include the scholars, practitioners, or organizations beyond those of the researchers and participants).
    • Participation in research projects must be voluntary, and results are typically presented in an academic publication. 
  • QA/QI: The primary purpose of a QA/QI activity is to evaluate the functioning of an organization, service, or program, with the goal of improving services provided by the organization, by monitoring the quality of the output produced.
    • The activity or data collection may already be happening at the organization, would likely happen with or without the involvement of the Laurier researcher, and participation in the project may be mandatory for those within the organization.
    • The results of these projects are normally site-specific and benefit the organization itself.
    • Results typically stay internal to the organization but may be presented in a public forum as long as the primary purpose remains QA/QI and not academic ‘research’.
    • Results are not ‘generalizable’ beyond the specific population that the sample is being drawn from. 

QA/QI activities which do contain additional research components may require ethics review, and if a researcher knows at the beginning that a project will serve two purposes (that of QA/QI and research), the project must undergo ethics review before it begins. See TCPS 2 Article 2.5 for guidance.

If these QA/QI activities are meant to improve an internal process or program at Laurier, these activities are required to undergo administrative review prior to implementation. You can contact AdminResearch@wlu.ca for more information.

Creative Practice Activities

These activities can be defined as the processes through which an artist makes or interprets works of art. Creative practice can also include studies on how works of art are generated.

These activities do not typically require REB review. However, activities which use creative practice to seek responses from participants that will be analyzed to answer a research question are subject to REB review.

See TCPS 2 Article 2.6 for guidance.

Re-Use of De-Identified Cell Lines

REB review is not required for research that relies exclusively on the re-use of de-identified human somatic cell lines where:

  • the researcher will comply with known consent terms;
  • the researcher does not know or have access to the identity of the participant;
  • the researcher will not take any steps to identify the participant; and
  • the research is unlikely to reveal the identity of the participant.
    because privacy concerns are low and REB review would not add any further protections for research participants beyond those already provided by the source of the cell lines.

See TCPS 2 Chapter 12G for guidance.