If IACUC members have conflicts of interest, what is the best practice regarding protocol voting?

The best practice regarding protocol voting when IACUC members have conflicts of interest is that they must leave the room during deliberations and voting. This approach helps ensure that the integrity of the decision-making process is maintained.

When a member has a conflict of interest, their ability to make objective and impartial judgments may be compromised. By removing them from the room, it prevents any undue influence on the discussion and allows the remaining committee members to deliberate and vote based solely on the merits of the protocol without being swayed by the conflicted member.

This practice reinforces the ethical standards of the IACUC, ensuring that all protocols are evaluated fairly and that any potential biases are eliminated from the decision-making process. It also aligns with regulatory guidelines aimed at promoting transparency and accountability in animal research oversight.

In contrast, participating in deliberations or discussions while having a conflict of interest, or remaining in the room during votes, could undermine the process and lead to decisions that are not fully objective. Thus, requiring conflicted members to leave protects the integrity of the IACUC's evaluations and promotes trust in the oversight system.