Abstract

Failure to stay within an ethics committee (EC)-approved protocol limits is termed protocol deviation or violation (PD/PV), depending on the seriousness of the transgression and its attendant risks and/or harms. PD/PVs arise in the post-approval phase of the research and are often missed. Current guidelines expect ECs to detect, report and recommend suitable actions such that research participants' risks and harms are mitigated, to the extent possible. Yenepoya Ethics Committee-1 conducted an internal audit of ongoing postgraduate dissertations involving human participants to assess the occurrence of PD/PVs. 54 out of 80 postgraduates responded to our request for filling out a self-reported checklist. These responses were followed up with physical verification of the protocol-related documents. Protocol transgressions were classified as non-compliance (administrative issues), protocol deviations (minor transgressions with minimal or less than minimal increase in attendant risk to participants) and protocol violations (serious transgressions with more than minimal increase in attendant risk to participants). The non-compliances included non-reporting for audit and non-reporting of PDs. Protocol deviations included non-conformance to EC validity, sample size, approved methodology, informed consent process and documentation and suboptimal data storage. No protocol violations were observed. We report PD/PVs from these 54 protocols - with our assessment on the negative impact it may have on scientific validity, harm to participants, EC functioning and credibility of the institution - in the hope that our readers appreciate this important aspect of the post-approval process in the functioning of an EC.

Full Text
Paper version not known

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