What is true about the physician's study that reviews patient medical records intended for clinical treatment?

The statement that the study is human subject research which is eligible for expedited review is accurate because the study involves accessing patient medical records for clinical treatment purposes. When research involves identifiable private information about individuals, it typically qualifies as human subject research. However, because the study is reviewing existing medical records, it can often be eligible for expedited review, which allows for a faster review process by the Institutional Review Board (IRB). This means that while the study does involve human subjects, its nature may allow it to be processed more quickly compared to studies that require full board review, especially if the risks to participants are considered minimal and protocols for maintaining confidentiality and compliance with regulations are in place.

The other options touch on aspects that define research parameters, but they either mischaracterize the need for ethical considerations in research involving human subjects or misconstrue the regulations surrounding data utilization. For instance, while it is common practice to utilize de-identified data when feasible, the eligibility for expedited review is not dependent on the data being de-identified. Furthermore, studies that incorporate identifiable information, such as in the case of reviewing clinical data, do require IRB approval to ensure the protection of patient privacy and compliance with ethical standards.