What is the responsibility of a publication board in relation to ethical subject studies? While journals are in large part the main venue for academic publishing, conferences are heavily utilized in some other venues.  It seems from the venues I have been around, there is a separation between these two types of venues in regards to ethical review for publication.
While PLOS ONE has a specific statement about this:

Researchers submitting studies involving human participants must meet
the following requirements:
Obtain prior approval for human subjects research by an institutional
review board (IRB) or equivalent ethics committee(s)
...
All submissions describing clinical research and/or research on human
subjects will be checked by journal staff to ensure that the
requirements above are met. Failure to meet requirements may be
grounds for rejection. If issues are discovered after publication, we
may issue a correction or retraction as appropriate.

Organizations like COPE, which seem to be used by many groups (including ACM) do not seem to have ethical human subject studies under their 'Ethics' category.
Is receiving IRB approval only a matter that a university should care about? If an organization includes in proceedings or issue a paper that did not have IRB approval, is it only up to the university or author to retract this, or does the organization have a responsibility to do this?
In the US, the PHS regulations are fairly specific with respect to Research Integrity and the Responsibilities of institutions, and are found in 42 CFR Part 93.

This regulations mandates that Institutions have a published policy.  Most of the requirements for that policy involve procedures for holding data, investigations, whistleblowers, and doing what they can to protect the reputations of charged individuals who are not found to have committed misconduct.  There are also reporting requiments to ORI and funding institutions.

There are no specific requirements for requesting retractions from journals.  I looked at my own institution's policy, and it does not mention retraction requests.

That said, institutions tend to do whatever they are legally required to, and whatever they can do to protect their reputations.  They are also reticent to do things that they are not required to do that might result in lawsuits.  Put all that together, with appropriate weighting, and I suppose in some cases institutions would request retractions, and in others, they would not.