FDA 483 OBSERVATION · #394 OF 1,932 MOST-CITED

Consent form not approved/signed/dated

FDA cited this observation 66 times across 66 firms in recent inspections. Below: how it breaks down by program area and fiscal year, and real examples of how FDA worded it on Form FDA 483.

What this grouping is not

An observation-type page groups FDA’s published citation records. The grouping, the compliance steps and the root causes are SPEQ synthesis, not an FDA classification of any citation, and a count measures what FDA published rather than risk.

BY PROGRAM AREA
Bioresearch Monitoring66
BY FISCAL YEAR
FY20264
FY20252
FY20244
FY20232
FY20224
FY20217
FY20202
FY20196
FY201810
FY201714
FY201611

What this observation is associated with

Firms cited for this observation also appear in FDA compliance actions — warning letters, injunctions, or seizures — at 1× the rate of the average FDA-cited firm (7.6% vs 7.8%), across 66 FEI-matched firms.

This is an association, not causation, and reflects co-occurrence in FDA's records — not a claim that the observation caused or preceded the action.

CHECKING ACCESS

Checking your access…

How FDA worded it — real examples

Informed consent was not properly documented in that the written informed consent used in the study was not approved by the IRB.

Pramod K. Mistry, M.D. · New Haven, Connecticut · Bioresearch Monitoring · 2026-07-31

Informed consent was not properly documented in that the written informed consent used in the study was not approved by the IRB.

Jae S. Cho, M.D · Cleveland, Ohio · Bioresearch Monitoring · 2025-12-31

Informed consent was not properly documented in that the written informed consent used in the study was not dated by the subject or the subject's legally authorized representative at the time of consent.

Alvin C. Silva, MD · Phoenix, Arizona · Bioresearch Monitoring · 2025-12-05

Informed consent was not properly documented in that the written informed consent used in the study was not approved by the IRB and was not dated by the subject or the subject's legally authorized representative at the time of consent.

David S. Krakow, M.D. · Mount Kisco, New York · Bioresearch Monitoring · 2025-11-21

Informed consent was not properly documented in that the written informed consent used in the study was not dated by the subject or the subject's legally authorized representative at the time of consent.

Matthew A. Cunningham, M.D. · Orlando, Florida · Bioresearch Monitoring · 2025-04-18

Informed consent was not properly documented in that the written informed consent used in the study was not signed by the subject or the subject's legally authorized representative at the time of consent and was not dated by the subject or the subject's legally authorized representative at the time of consent.

Naseem A. Jaffrani, M.D. · Alexandria, Louisiana · Bioresearch Monitoring · 2025-03-13

Related SPEQ references

Where to read the requirements behind this observation area on SPEQ. These are SPEQ's topic and audience pages — not an FDA classification of the citation.

GCP discipline →

Examples are a representative sample of FDA's published inspection observations. Open the 483 observation explorer →