Research ethics

Ethical approval for research involving geographically dispersed subjects: unsuitability of the UK MREC/LREC system and relevance to uncommon genetic disorders

Julia C Lewis, Susan Tomkins and Julian R Sampson

University of Wales College of Medicine, Cardiff

Objectives—To assess the process involved in obtaining ethical approval for a single-centre study involving geographically dispersed subjects with an uncommon genetic disorder.

Design—Observational data of the application process to 53 local research ethics committees (LRECs) throughout Wales, England and Scotland. The Multicentre Research Ethics Committee (MREC) for Wales had already granted approval.

Results—Application to the 53 LRECs required 24,552 sheets of paper and took two months of the researcher's time. The median time taken for approval was 39 days with only seven (13%) of committees responding within the recommended 21 days. In at least nineteen cases (36%) a subcommittee considered the application. Thirty-three committees (62%) accepted the proposal without amendments but, of the remainder, four (8%) requested changes outside of the remit of LRECs.

Discussion—Difficulties still exist with the system for obtaining ethical approval for studies involving a single centre but with patients at multiple sites, as is often required for genetic observational research. As such studies differ from true multicentre studies, it may be advantageous to develop a separate and specific process of application to ensure that resources are not unnecessarily expended in the quest for ethical approval.

Key Words: Research ethics • MREC • LREC

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Hunter, D L H (2008). The ESRC research ethics framework and research ethics review at UK universities: rebuilding the Tower of Babel REC by REC. J. Med. Ethics 34: 815-820 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Elliott, L, Hunter, D (2008). The experiences of ethics committee members: contradictions between individuals and committees. J. Med. Ethics 34: 489-494 [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]  
• Glasziou, P., Chalmers, I. (2004). Ethics review roulette: what can we learn?. BMJ 328: 121-122 [Full Text]