Bureaucracy of ethics applications

doi:10.1136/bmj.329.7460.282

BMJ 2004;329:282-284 (31 July), doi:10.1136/bmj.329.7460.282

Education and debate

Bureaucracy of ethics applications

David S Wald, clinical research fellow¹

¹ Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, London EC1M 6BQ d.s.wald@qmul.ac.uk

One research group decided to determine exactly how much effortis required to get ethical approval by recording the submissionof its first application under the new UK system

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

Introduction

March 2004 heralded the introduction of the new Central Officefor Research Ethics Committees (COREC) application form anda bad time for anyone aiming to conduct clinical research inthe United Kingdom. Here I recount the experience of a clinicalresearch group submitting the first application at their universityhospital. We logged the time and activity required for the applicationprocess.

We designed a double blind randomised, placebo controlled, factorialstudy in 50 volunteers to determine whether the blood pressurelowering effects of a low dose ${beta}$ blocker and low dose angiotensinconverting enzyme inhibitor are independent. We sought no externalfunding for the study and expected no ethical obstacles.

Credit: TONWEN JONES

Application process

The application procedure began with a phone call to the localresearch ethics committee to find out the dates of the forthcomingcommittee meetings and submission deadlines. We received a listof dates and were advised that the . . . [Full text of this article]

COREC 2

COREC application

Discussion

CiteULike

Complore

Connotea

Del.icio.us Add to Digg

Digg

StumbleUpon Add to Technorati

Technorati What's this?

Relevant Articles

Towards sustainable clinical trials: Sustainable Trials Study Group
BMJ 2007 334: 671-673. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Ethics and research governance in a multicentre study: add 150 days to your study protocol: Glyn Elwyn, Anne Seagrove, Kym Thorne, and Wai Yee Cheung
BMJ 2005 330: 847. [Extract] [Full Text]

Advisory group to review NHS research ethics committees: Susan Mayor
BMJ 2004 329: 1258. [Extract] [Full Text]

Research bureaucracy in the United Kingdom: Seeking a balance: response from the Department of Health and COREC: John Pattison and Terry Stacey
BMJ 2004 329: 622. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Research bureaucracy in the United Kingdom: Good governance is needed: Woody Caan
BMJ 2004 329: 623. [Extract] [Full Text]

Research bureaucracy in the United Kingdom: Ask for help: Colette M Reid
BMJ 2004 329: 624. [Extract] [Full Text]

New ethics committee regulations hinder research
BMJ 2004 329: 0. [Full Text] [PDF]

My last choice: Richard Smith
BMJ 2004 329: 0. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Campaign to revitalise academic medicine: Don't believe us: David L Sackett
BMJ 2004 329: 294. [Extract] [Full Text]

Campaign to revitalise academic medicine: Is the bubble due to burst for medical research funding?: Bruce G Charlton and Peter Andras
BMJ 2004 329: 294. [Extract] [Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

Barke, R. (2009). Balancing Uncertain Risks and Benefits in Human Subjects Research. Science Technology Human Values 34: 337-364 [Abstract]
Angell, E, Dixon-Woods, M (2009). Do research ethics committees identify process errors in applications for ethical approval?. J. Med. Ethics 35: 130-132 [Abstract] [Full text]
Hallowell, N., Cooke, S., Crawford, G., Parker, M., Lucassen, A. (2008). Ethics and research governance: the views of researchers, health-care professionals and other stakeholders. Clin Ethics 3: 85-90 [Abstract] [Full text]
Arshad, A, Arkwright, P D (2008). Status of healthcare studies submitted to UK research ethics committees for approval in 2004-5. J. Med. Ethics 34: 393-395 [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]
Masterton, G., Shah, P. (2007). How to approach a research ethics committee. Adv. Psychiatr. Treat. 13: 220-227 [Abstract] [Full text]
Group, S. T. S. (2007). Towards sustainable clinical trials. BMJ 334: 671-673 [Full text]
Seiler, C M, Kellmeyer, P, Kienle, P, Buchler, M W, Knaebel, H-P, the INSECT Study Group, (2007). Assessment of the ethical review process for non-pharmacological multicentre studies in Germany on the basis of a randomised surgical trial. J. Med. Ethics 33: 113-118 [Abstract] [Full text]
Macduff, C., McKie, A., Martindale, S., Rennie, A. M., West, B., Wilcock, S. (2007). A Novel Framework for Reflecting on the Functioning of Research Ethics Review Panels. Nurs Ethics 14: 99-116 [Abstract]
Spathis, A. (2007). Letters to the editor: Medicinal studies in palliative care: impact of the EU clinical trials directive. Palliat Med 21: 60-61
Beardsmore, C S, Westaway, J A (2007). The shifting sands of research ethics and governance: effect on research in paediatrics. Arch. Dis. Child. 92: 80-81 [Abstract] [Full text]
Sheard, L, Tompkins, C N E, Wright, N M J, Adams, C E (2006). Non-commercial clinical trials of a medicinal product: can they survive the current process of research approvals in the UK?. J. Med. Ethics 32: 430-434 [Abstract] [Full text]
Lelliott, P. (2005). Beware the problems of centralisation. Commentary on... Mental health research system in England. Psychiatr. Bull. 29: 446-447 [Full text]
Shaw, S., Boynton, P. M, Greenhalgh, T. (2005). Research governance: where did it come from, what does it mean?. JRSM 98: 496-502 [Abstract] [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]
Hill, J., Foster, N., Hughes, R., Hay, E. (2005). Meeting the challenges of research governance. Rheumatology (Oxford) 44: 571-572 [Full text]
Elwyn, G., Seagrove, A., Thorne, K., Cheung, W. Y. (2005). Ethics and research governance in a multicentre study: add 150 days to your study protocol. BMJ 330: 847-847 [Full text]
Abbasi, K., Heath, I. (2005). Ethics review of research and audit. BMJ 330: 431-432 [Full text]
Caan, W. (2004). Research bureaucracy in the United Kingdom: Good governance is needed. BMJ 329: 623-623 [Full text]
Reid, C. M (2004). Research bureaucracy in the United Kingdom: Ask for help. BMJ 329: 624-624 [Full text]
Warlow, C. (2004). Clinical research under the cosh again. BMJ 329: 241-242 [Full text]
Meredith, S. (2004). Better support for investigators is essential. BMJ 329: 285-285 [Full text]

Rapid Responses:

Read all Rapid Responses

Disability discrimination legislation will require reform of ethics application procedures.: John M Starr
bmj.com, 30 Jul 2004 [Full text]
Site-specific assessments - yet another barrier to research: Karen Spilsbury, et al.
bmj.com, 30 Jul 2004 [Full text]
Ethical Regress?: Ramesh P Arasaradnam, et al.
bmj.com, 31 Jul 2004 [Full text]
Ethics committees: a solution for juniors: Simon N Madge
bmj.com, 1 Aug 2004 [Full text]
It doesn't have to be this way: Andrew J. Lotery
bmj.com, 1 Aug 2004 [Full text]
Bureaucratic nightmare.: Linda M. Bailey
bmj.com, 3 Aug 2004 [Full text]
Re: Bureaucracy of ethics applications: Robert Dingwall, et al.
bmj.com, 3 Aug 2004 [Full text]
Bureaucracy of research governance: Stephen Goodall, et al.
bmj.com, 4 Aug 2004 [Full text]
RECs - the 'conspiracy theory': Sanju George
bmj.com, 10 Aug 2004 [Full text]
It's no better over here: Anna Fierz
bmj.com, 12 Aug 2004 [Full text]
10 top tips for completing the COREC form: Julie L Scott, et al.
bmj.com, 12 Aug 2004 [Full text]
Ask for help!: Colette M Reid
bmj.com, 18 Aug 2004 [Full text]
Re: Site-specific assessments - yet another barrier to research: Chris Speed
bmj.com, 19 Aug 2004 [Full text]
Questionnaire Quibbles: Simon J Quantrill, et al.
bmj.com, 24 Aug 2004 [Full text]