Abstract

BackgroundClinical trials throughout the world must be evaluated by research ethics committees. No one has yet attempted to clearly quantify at the national level the activity of ethics committees and describe the characteristics of the protocols submitted. The objectives of this study were to describe 1) the workload and the activity of Research Ethics Committees in France, and 2) the characteristics of protocols approved on a nation-wide basis.MethodsRetrospective cohort of 976 protocols approved by a representative sample of 25/48 of French Research Ethics Committees in 1994. Protocols characteristics (design, study size, investigator), number of revisions requested by the ethics committee before approval, time to approval and number of amendments after approval were collected for each protocol by trained research assistant using the committee's files and archives.ResultsThirty-one percent of protocols were approved with no modifications requested in 16 days (95% CI: 14–17). The number of revisions requested by the committee, and amendments submitted by the investigator was on average respectively 39 (95% CI: 25–53) and 37 (95% CI: 27–46), per committee and per year. When revisions were requested, the main reasons were related to information to the patient (28%) and consent modalities (18%). Drugs were the object of research in 68% of the protocols examined. The majority of the research was national (80%) with a predominance of single-centre studies. Workload per protocol has been estimated at twelve and half hours on average for administrative support and at eleven and half hours for expertise.ConclusionThe estimated workload justifies specific and independent administrative and financial support for Research Ethics Committees.

Highlights

  • Clinical trials throughout the world must be evaluated by research ethics committees

  • Clinical trials in biomedical research throughout the world must be evaluated by research ethics committees

  • France was one of the first country to affirm these principles through the Huriet-Sérusclat Act of 1988 [5], which launched administrative and financially independent research ethics committees (REC) in 1991, called CCPPRBs

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Clinical trials throughout the world must be evaluated by research ethics committees. No one has yet attempted to clearly quantify the activity of ethics committees and describe the characteristics of the protocols submitted, and only five studies[1,2,3,4] have dealt with this subject, two in England and the others in the USA, Australia and Spain. They each focused (page number not for citation purposes). Modifications proposed by the investigator to the committee after approval Investigators can send information concerning their study (state of inclusions, article, etc.) This information does not lead to a decision by the REC

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call