Which of the following protocols is the one that is most likely to require IRB review?

The scenario involving a study to evaluate a newly designed wheelchair by asking elderly individuals to use it is most likely to require Institutional Review Board (IRB) review because it involves direct interaction with human subjects. The key factor here is that the research design includes collecting data from individuals through their experiences, which entails intervention on real participants to assess the effects of the wheelchair.

In this case, ethical considerations come into play since the study may involve potential risks to the participants, informed consent, and the need to ensure the well-being of those involved. The IRB's role is to ensure that the research is conducted ethically, protecting participants from harm and ensuring that their rights are respected throughout the study.

In contrast, the other options entail activities that either do not involve direct human subjects or do not present significant ethical concerns that warrant an IRB's oversight. For instance, conducting an online survey on community health may not require IRB review if it collects anonymous data and does not identify individual participants. Analyzing anonymous data from public records typically does not involve human subjects in a way that necessitates ethical review. Similarly, a literature review compiles existing research rather than involving new data collection from participants, which generally falls outside the IRB’s purview.