Andrew A Mallick1, Finbar J K O'Callaghan. 1. Bristol Institute of Child Life and Health, Academic Unit of Child Health, Level 6, UBHT Education Centre Upper Maudlin Street, Bristol BS2 8AE, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the delay in research governance approval for a non-interventional, multicentre study in the United Kingdom. DESIGN: The times taken from application to the granting of research governance approval for an observational study of childhood stroke with ethical approval were prospectively recorded. SETTING: Ninety-two acute NHS Trusts in the United Kingdom. Main outcome measures Median delay (in working days) between application and research governance approval. RESULTS: The median delay between application and research governance approval was 43 working days (interquartile range 27-62, range 0-147). The reason for delay beyond 43 working days was inexplicable in 30 (70%) of 44 trusts. CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable variation in the processes undertaken by research and development departments that can lead to significant delays in commencing an ethically approved study. Any improvements to the systems for gaining approval are welcome.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the delay in research governance approval for a non-interventional, multicentre study in the United Kingdom. DESIGN: The times taken from application to the granting of research governance approval for an observational study of childhood stroke with ethical approval were prospectively recorded. SETTING: Ninety-two acute NHS Trusts in the United Kingdom. Main outcome measures Median delay (in working days) between application and research governance approval. RESULTS: The median delay between application and research governance approval was 43 working days (interquartile range 27-62, range 0-147). The reason for delay beyond 43 working days was inexplicable in 30 (70%) of 44 trusts. CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable variation in the processes undertaken by research and development departments that can lead to significant delays in commencing an ethically approved study. Any improvements to the systems for gaining approval are welcome.
Authors: Rustam Al-Shahi Salman; Timothy M Brock; Martin S Dennis; Peter A G Sandercock; Philip M White; Charles Warlow Journal: J R Soc Med Date: 2007-02 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Helen Snooks; Hayley Hutchings; Anne Seagrove; Sarah Stewart-Brown; John Williams; Ian Russell Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2012-08-16 Impact factor: 4.615
Authors: Daniel Hind; Barnaby C Reeves; Sarah Bathers; Christopher Bray; Andrea Corkhill; Christopher Hayward; Lynda Harper; Vicky Napp; John Norrie; Chris Speed; Liz Tremain; Nicola Keat; Mike Bradburn Journal: Trials Date: 2017-05-02 Impact factor: 2.279