1 / 10

What should RECs be reviewing?

What should RECs be reviewing?. Criteria Define minimal risk Who decides Student research Health care vs social research. Criteria?. Research is designed to produce generalisable knowledge Exemptions? Minimal risk defined Expedited review as a third category

ritchiea
Download Presentation

What should RECs be reviewing?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. What should RECs be reviewing? • Criteria • Define minimal risk • Who decides • Student research • Health care vs social research

  2. Criteria? • Research is designed to produce generalisable knowledge • Exemptions? • Minimal risk defined • Expedited review as a third category • Vulnerable groups e.g. children • N.B. publication requires prior ethical review

  3. Define minimal risk • Not only involving physical contact? • All vulnerable groups • Include behavioural studies? Not only internal controls/ self-regulation? • Depends on topic especially mental health • Risk is the risk that a person is exposed to in their usual environment and activities. • Different for different subjects e.g. healthy and sick child

  4. Who decides • Elaborate review only for more than minimal : decided by initial process (e.g. ethics advisors or chairperson)

  5. examples • South Africa two layers expedited and full • Council of Europe additional protocol: all health care interventions, risk of psychological harm • Kenya: no categories. Surveys a problem (PEPFAR) • El Salvador: expedited and full reviews. But no clear guidelines

  6. Student research • Same criteria. Also because of training role of REC (incorporate into existing research) • Not all reviewed in all countries (Lithuania, Nigeria) • Classify level (undergraduate etc.) expedite minimal risk (exclude vulnerable groups) • Include supervisors / faculty in review process • Support and feedback for students? Is this the role of the REC? Probably not • Can REC members provide individual advice or support?

  7. Same standards for students? • Fair ? • Appropriate for the type of research performed eg retrospective chart review • Essential as educational exercise/ experience • Ethical review is for subjects! • Supervisors’ role • Time pressures?

  8. Fair that students collect data for their supervisors? • Part of their research experience, but must always be evaluated according to project

  9. Specific qualifications for student reviewers? • No distinction from other researchers • But recurring errors in groups • Student members of REC?

  10. Distinctions between “health” research vs “social” (behavioural) research • Categories of research important • Consider community impact in behavioural research • Research methodology e.g. qualitative different review process? • Unusual projects e.g. oral histories • Mental health research

More Related