Literature DB >> 11579194

Ethical approval for research involving geographically dispersed subjects: unsuitability of the UK MREC/LREC system and relevance to uncommon genetic disorders.

J C Lewis1, S Tomkins, J R Sampson.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To assess the process involved in obtaining ethical approval for a single-centre study involving geographically dispersed subjects with an uncommon genetic disorder.
DESIGN: Observational data of the application process to 53 local research ethics committees (LRECs) throughout Wales, England and Scotland. The Multicentre Research Ethics Committee (MREC) for Wales had already granted approval.
RESULTS: Application to the 53 LRECs required 24,552 sheets of paper and took two months of the researcher's time. The median time taken for approval was 39 days with only seven (13%) of committees responding within the recommended 21 days. In at least nineteen cases (36%) a subcommittee considered the application. Thirty-three committees (62%) accepted the proposal without amendments but, of the remainder, four (8%) requested changes outside of the remit of LRECs. DISCUSSION: Difficulties still exist with the system for obtaining ethical approval for studies involving a single centre but with patients at multiple sites, as is often required for genetic observational research. As such studies differ from true multicentre studies, it may be advantageous to develop a separate and specific process of application to ensure that resources are not unnecessarily expended in the quest for ethical approval.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomedical and Behavioral Research; Empirical Approach; Genetics and Reproduction

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11579194      PMCID: PMC1733461          DOI: 10.1136/jme.27.5.347

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Ethics        ISSN: 0306-6800            Impact factor:   2.903


  18 in total

1.  Multicentre research ethics committees: have they helped?

Authors:  I Larcombe; M Mott
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 5.344

2.  The new system of review by multicentre research ethics committees: prospective study.

Authors:  J Tully; N Ninis; R Booy; R Viner
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-04-29

3.  Ethical review of a multicentre study in Scotland: a weighty problem.

Authors:  R al-Shahi; C P Warlow
Journal:  J R Coll Physicians Lond       Date:  1999 Nov-Dec

4.  World Medical Association Meets in Helsinki.

Authors:  S Gilder
Journal:  Br Med J       Date:  1964-08-01

5.  Local research ethics committee approval for a national study in Scotland.

Authors:  K W Ah-See; J MacKenzie; N S Thakker; A G Maran
Journal:  J R Coll Surg Edinb       Date:  1998-10

6.  Research ethics committee audit: differences between committees.

Authors:  M E Redshaw; A Harris; J D Baum
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 2.903

7.  Local research ethics committees' approval in a national population study.

Authors:  A Busby; H Dolk
Journal:  J R Coll Physicians Lond       Date:  1998 Mar-Apr

Review 8.  Comprehensive mutation analysis of TSC1 and TSC2-and phenotypic correlations in 150 families with tuberous sclerosis.

Authors:  A C Jones; M M Shyamsundar; M W Thomas; J Maynard; S Idziaszczyk; S Tomkins; J R Sampson; J P Cheadle
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 11.025

9.  Multicentre research ethics committees.

Authors:  J I Alexander
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 18.000

10.  Why do research ethics committees disagree with each other?

Authors:  C Foster
Journal:  J R Coll Physicians Lond       Date:  1995 Jul-Aug
View more
  2 in total

1.  Ethics review roulette: what can we learn?

Authors:  Paul Glasziou; Iain Chalmers
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-01-17

Review 2.  Research ethics committees in the UK--the pressure is now on research and development departments.

Authors:  Rustam Al-Shahi
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 18.000

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.