Tab K Memoranda concerning sampling of experiments - Memorandum from Gil Whittemore regarding preliminary plan for sampling large, undifferentiated lists of experiments DISCLAIMER The following is a staff memorandum or other working document prepared for the members of the Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments. It should not be construed as representing the final conclusions of fact or interpretation of the issues. All staff memoranda are subject to revision based on further information and analysis. For conclusions and recommendations of the Advisory Committee, readers are advised to consult the Final Report to be published in 1995. MEMORANDUM TO: Mary Ann Stevenson (Chair of Cold War Subcommittee Duncan Thomas (Chair of Scope Subcommittee) FROM: Gil Whittemore DATE: July 20,1994 (revision of June 22,1994 Memorandum) RE: Preliminary Plan for Sampling Large, Undifferentiated Lists of Experiments My understanding from the last telephone conference is that you desired a written summary of the plan for dealing with the large, undifferentiated lists. That summary is provided below. The next step is for the Chairs of the Subcommittees to discuss what should be the next step. Based on the June 21 telephone conference of the Scope and Cold War Subcommittees, the following is my understanding of Duncan's six step plan for dealing with the large lists of experiment title provided by various agencies: 1. Develop an itemized inventory of the lists themselves. 2. Using the scant information available on the lists, tentatively classify the experiments according to the basic types being developed for our information system (i.e. those on the latest version of the "Summary Report Form: Experiments of Interest"). a. This will require someone with some medical training to interpret technical titles. b. If our typology is clear, agency personnel may be able to assist in the classification. C. Many experiments may still end up being classified as the "unknown" type. 3. After tallying up the number of experiments of each type, prioritize the types according to their importance for the Committee's. work. 4. Draw a random sample from each of the types. The number selected of each type mav van, according to priorities established in step 3 and the total number of each type. 5. If necessary, develop a special sampling technique for the experiments still classified as of an it "unknown" type. 6. Considering time, personnel resources, and priorities, request appropriate documents for the selected sample experiments. My understanding is that the main concern is for the Committee as a whole to discuss and approve an overall plan for dealing with the undifferentiated lists, even though this plan might not be implemented by staff immediately. (For instance, awaiting the development of a computerized information system -will make it easier for us to cross-check names of investigators to see if a particular experiment is already known to us from other sources.)