Research ethics committee audit: differences between committees

Journal of Medical Ethics 22 (2):78-82 (1996)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The same research proposal was submitted to 24 district health authority (DHA) research ethics committees in different parts of the country. The objective was to obtain permission for a multi-centre research project. The study of neonatal care in different types of unit (regional, subregional and district), required that four health authorities were approached in each of six widely separated health regions in England. Data were collected and compared concerning aspects of processing, including application forms, information required, timing and decision-making. The key finding was that ethics committees received and processed the applications variably, reflecting individual factors and local problems. To improve consensus and facilitate multicentre studies, standard forms and instructions are suggested and the establishment of a national committee or advisory group advocated

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Audit committee features and earnings management: Further evidence from singapore.J.-L. W. Mitchell Der Zahvann & Greg Tower - 2004 - International Journal of Business Governance and Ethics 1 (s 2-3):233-258.
The ethics committee as ghost author.David Shaw - 2011 - Journal of Medical Ethics 37 (12):706-706.
Clinical audit and reform of the UK research ethics review system.E. Cave & C. Nichols - 2007 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 28 (3):181-203.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-09-13

Downloads
44 (#351,926)

6 months
18 (#135,873)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?