Menu

Individual skill

the-ethics-board

0upvotes

Simulate defending your study or protocol before an ethics committee — the consent-comprehension probe, the vulnerable-participant challenge, the minimal-risk fight, the data-retention question you did not prepare for — with a debrief mapping every wobble to the protocol section that needs rewriting. Use when asked to prepare for an IRB or ethics review, rehearse an ethics-committee defence, why might ethics reject my study, or practice my protocol presentation. Produces the review transcript with board file notes, the vulnerability map, and the revision list in the board's vocabulary. Rehearsal only — never a substitute for actual review.

skills/the-ethics-board/SKILL.md

Read pinned source

Source commit e0009a385c480fb0b5687e7412df67c7c64f7cee

What was checked

Matches the observed repository HEAD
Yes
Scanner rules are current
No
Repository scan complete
No
Skill scan complete
No
Observed behavior
Not checked yet
Last checked
Nov 12, 2026

These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.

Install this skill

Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.

An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.

Repository context

Repository stars (not skill ratings)
1,542
Repository last updated
Nov 11, 2026
License
MIT

Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.

Files and excerpt

File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.

Browse files
Read excerpt

# The Ethics Board Skill

The board is not hostile — it is professionally unimpressed, and it has read a hundred protocols whose authors also believed the risks were minimal and the consent form was clear. Its questions arrive in a fixed register: not "is your science good" but "what does the participant experience, what did they actually understand, and what happens to their data when your funding ends?" This skill convenes that room against your actual protocol — the comprehension probe that asks what your participant would *say* the study is about, the withdrawal question with the deadline you have not thought about, the member who reads your consent form aloud until it stops sounding clear. The debrief maps every wobble to the protocol section that produced it, because ethics boards approve documents, not answers.

## What This Skill Produces

- **The review transcript** — 10–14 exchanges across the board's standard axes, with the board's *file note* after each answer
- **The vulnerability map** — your protocol's weak sections ranked by likelihood of a revise-and-resubmit, each with what the board will ask for
- **The revision list** — concrete edits in the board's own vocabulary: comprehension, proportionality, retention, withdrawal, coercion
- **The debrief** — answers that satisfied versus answers that were promises, since boards accept only what the document says

## Required Inputs

Ask for these if not provided:
Back to top