Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorTridente, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorHolloway, PAHen_US
dc.contributor.authorHutton, Pen_US
dc.contributor.authorGordon, ACen_US
dc.contributor.authorMills, GHen_US
dc.contributor.authorClarke, GMen_US
dc.contributor.authorChiche, J-Den_US
dc.contributor.authorStuber, Fen_US
dc.contributor.authorGarrard, Cen_US
dc.contributor.authorHinds, Cen_US
dc.contributor.authorBion, Jen_US
dc.contributor.authorGenOSept National Coordinators, European Society of Intensive Care Medicineen_US
dc.date.accessioned2019-08-13T15:04:11Z
dc.date.available2019-04-22en_US
dc.date.issued2019-05-07en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/xmlui/handle/123456789/59107
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: During the set-up phase of an international study of genetic influences on outcomes from sepsis, we aimed to characterise potential differences in ethics approval processes and outcomes in participating European countries. METHODS: Between 2005 and 2007 of the FP6-funded international Genetics Of Sepsis and Septic Shock (GenOSept) project, we asked national coordinators to complete a structured survey of research ethic committee (REC) approval structures and processes in their countries, and linked these data to outcomes. Survey findings were reconfirmed or modified in 2017. RESULTS: Eighteen countries participated in the study, recruiting 2257 patients from 160 ICUs. National practices differed widely in terms of composition of RECs, procedures and duration of the ethics approval process. Eight (44.4%) countries used a single centralised process for approval, seven (38.9%) required approval by an ethics committee in each participating hospital, and three (16.7%) required both. Outcomes of the application process differed widely between countries because of differences in national legislation, and differed within countries because of interpretation of the ethics of conducting research in patients lacking capacity. The RECs in four countries had no lay representation. The median time from submission to final decision was 1.5 (interquartile range 1-7) months; in nine (50%) approval was received within 1 month; six took over 6 months, and in one 24 months; had all countries been able to match the most efficient approvals processes, an additional 74 months of country or institution-level recruitment would have been available. In three countries, rejection of the application by some local RECs resulted in loss of centres; and one country rejected the application outright. CONCLUSIONS: The potential benefits of the single application portal offered by the European Clinical Trials Regulation will not be realised without harmonisation of research ethics committee practices as well as national legislation.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipEuropean Union and the 6th Framework Programme (European Commission Reference: LSHM-CT-2005- 518226)
dc.description.sponsorshipWellcome Trust Core Award (Grant Number 090532/Z/09/Z)
dc.format.extent30 - ?en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.relation.ispartofBMC Med Ethicsen_US
dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
dc.subjectDecision-makingen_US
dc.subjectGenOSepten_US
dc.subjectGenetic epidemiologyen_US
dc.subjectHuman geneticsen_US
dc.subjectIntensive careen_US
dc.subjectResearch ethicsen_US
dc.subjectConfidentialityen_US
dc.subjectCritical Illnessen_US
dc.subjectEthics Committees, Researchen_US
dc.subjectEuropeen_US
dc.subjectHumansen_US
dc.subjectInformed Consenten_US
dc.subjectInternational Cooperationen_US
dc.subjectMental Competencyen_US
dc.subjectMolecular Epidemiologyen_US
dc.subjectSurveys and Questionnairesen_US
dc.titleMethodological challenges in European ethics approvals for a genetic epidemiology study in critically ill patients: the GenOSept experience.en_US
dc.typeArticle
dc.rights.holder© The Author(s). 2019
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12910-019-0370-1en_US
pubs.author-urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31064358en_US
pubs.issue1en_US
pubs.notesNot knownen_US
pubs.publication-statusPublished onlineen_US
pubs.volume20en_US
dc.rights.licensehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dcterms.dateAccepted2019-04-22en_US
rioxxterms.funderDefault funderen_US
rioxxterms.identifier.projectDefault projecten_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record