Resources to Aid Ethical Review of Clinical Studies: Gaps and Opportunities

Author:

Pittelkow Merle-MarieORCID,Strech DanielORCID

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundResearch Ethics Committees (RECs) review the ethical, legal, and methodological standard of clinical research. However, complying with all requirements and professional expectations while maintaining the necessary scientific and ethical standards can be challenging for applicants and members of the REC alike. There is a need for easily accessible and clear guidelines and resources to help medical researchers and REC members navigate the legal and ethical requirements and the process of their review.MethodsWe employed an explorative search for resources on the websites of relevant stakeholders including 12 national umbrella associations (six German-language and six English-language), three English-language international umbrella associations, and 16 national REC’s of major university hospitals (eight German- and eight English-language). We mapped the identified resources onto the guiding principles of ethical clinical research and 35 related checkpoints. To describe the content of the resources we conducted a thematic analysis.ResultsWe extracted a total of 233 resources, including templates (n= 134, 58.5%), guidelines/recommendations (n= 62, 26.6%), checklists (n= 23, 9.9%), tools (n= 5, 2.2%), flowcharts (n= 5, 2.2%), glossaries (n= 3, 1.3%), and one (0.4%) software program. We extracted 101 German and 132 English resources created between 2004 and 2023. The majority (n =204; 87.6%) could be assigned to one checkpoint. The remaining 29 (12.5%) resources were considered unspecific (e.g., a checklist which documents to be submitted for a German drug trial). The specific resources are discussed per checkpoint.ConclusionWhile much support is available for some aspects such as participant information and informed consent forms, it is lacking in other areas such as study design, analysis, and biometrics. More support should be provided in these areas to ensure that research projects are methodologically sound. A more detailed analysis of the quality of available resources could help identify other areas of need.

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

Reference15 articles.

1. Inclusive, engaged, and accountable institutional review boards

2. Arbeitskreis Medizinischer Ethikkommissionen in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland e.V. (2023). AKEK - Arbeitskreis Medizinischer Ethik-Kommissionen. https://www.akek.de

3. Bundesinstitute für Arzneimittel und Medizinprodukte. (2023). Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien. Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien. https://www.bfarm.de/DE/Das-BfArM/Aufgaben/Deutsches-Register-Klinischer-Studien/_node.html

4. Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences. (2016). International ethical guidelines for health-related research involving humans (4th Edition). CIOMS.

5. The Experimental Design Assistant

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3