BMJ 2000;320:1157-1158 ( 29 April )

Editorials

Multicentre research ethics committees: has the cure been worse than the disease?

No, but idiosyncracies and obstructions to good research must be removed

Papers pp   1179 , 1182 , 1183 Personal view p   1217

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

I first wrote about the byzantine labyrinth that surrounded obtaining ethics committees' approval for multicentre studies in England in 1995, as well as mentioning other unsatisfactory aspects of local research ethics committees.¹ At that time a working party of the chief medical officer suggested the establishment of multicentre research ethics committees on a regional basis to take care of multicentre studies. These were established in 1997.² So is it now simpler to obtain approval for multicentre studies? Are decisions reached more speedily? Are local research ethics committees restricting their comments on multicentre studies to local problems? Or has yet another layer of bureaucracy been added, making the process even more labyrinthine?

In the past two years frustrated research workers have regularly told me that the new system is a disaster. Early feedback suggested that local research ethics committees were finding their subordinate role difficult. These committees have always jealously guarded their . . . [Full text of this article]

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    StumbleUpon    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Articles

Ebrahim's quartet
BMJ 2000 320: 0. [Full Text] [PDF]

Ebrahim's quartet
BMJ 2000 320: 0. [Full Text] [PDF]

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

Joanna Tully, Nelly Ninis, Robert Booy, and Russell Viner
BMJ 2000 320: 1179-1182. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Responses of local research ethics committees to a study with approval from a multicentre research ethics committee

Andrew L Lux, Stuart W Edwards, and John P Osborne
BMJ 2000 320: 1182-1183. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

The cost of getting approval

Sandra Flynn
BMJ 2000 320: 1183. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

The ethics of research ethics committees

Jon Nicholl
BMJ 2000 320: 1217. [Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Reynolds, J, Crichton, N, Fisher, W, Sacks, S (2008). Determining the need for ethical review: a three-stage Delphi study. J. Med. Ethics 34: 889-894 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Larkin, P. J, de Casterle, B. D., Schotsmans, P. (2008). A Relational Ethical Dialogue With Research Ethics Committees. Nurs Ethics 15: 234-242 [Abstract]  
• Richardson, S., McMullan, M. (2007). Research Ethics in the UK: What Can Sociology Learn from Health?. Sociology 41: 1115-1132 [Abstract]  
• Lelliott, P. (2005). Beware the problems of centralisation. Commentary on... Mental health research system in England. Psychiatr. Bull. 29: 446-447 [Full text]  
• Al-Shahi, R. (2005). Research ethics committees in the UK--the pressure is now on research and development departments. JRSM 98: 444-447 [Full text]  
• Dal-Re, R, Ortega, R, Morejon, E (2005). Multicentre trials review process by research ethics committees in Spain: where do they stand before implementing the new European regulation?. J. Med. Ethics 31: 344-350 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Ward, H. J T, Cousens, S. N, Smith-Bathgate, B., Leitch, M., Everington, D., Will, R. G, Smith, P. G (2004). Obstacles to conducting epidemiological research in the UK general population. BMJ 329: 277-279 [Full text]  
• Boyce, M. (2002). Observational study of 353 applications to London multicentre research ethics committee 1997-2000. BMJ 325: 1081-1081 [Full text]  
• Cave, E, Holm, S (2002). New governance arrangements for research ethics committees: is facilitating research achieved at the cost of participants' interest. J. Med. Ethics 28: 318-321 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Ferris, L. E. (2002). Industry-sponsored pharmaceutical trials and research ethics boards: Are they cloaked in too much secrecy?. CMAJ 166: 1279-1280 [Full text]  
• , J., , , , J. (2001). Ethical approval for research involving geographically dispersed subjects: unsuitability of the UK MREC/LREC system and relevance to uncommon genetic. J. Med. Ethics 27: 347-351 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Ashcroft, R., Pfeffer, N. (2001). Ethics behind closed doors: do research ethics committees need secrecy?. BMJ 322: 1294-1296 [Full text]  
• Burman, W. J., Reves, R. R., Cohn, D. L., Schooley, R. T. (2001). Breaking the Camel's Back: Multicenter Clinical Trials and Local Institutional Review Boards. ANN INTERN MED 134: 152-157 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Smith, R. (2000). Babies and consent: yet another NHS scandal. BMJ 320: 1285-1286 [Full text]  

Rapid Responses:

Read all Rapid Responses

Researchers need clear cut instructions

A Fossard
bmj.com, 26 May 2000 [Full text]

Experience of the process of obtaining local research ethics committee approval

Janet Cade
bmj.com, 6 Jun 2000 [Full text]

Online poll

Find out more on doc2doc >>