Responses
Other responses
Jump to comment:
- Published on: 25 August 2006
- Published on: 4 August 2006
- Published on: 25 August 2006Response to Ethical Review of Non-commercial Clinical TrialsShow More
Dear Editor,
In response to the electronic letter by Peter Heasman “Ethical Review of Non-commercial Clinical Trials”, the LEEDS project team must emphasise that we do not wish to either overtly or covertly criticise activity of MREC individuals. We realise that many active researchers sit alongside non-researchers on MREC committees and surely our common goal is to foster a culture of research development and in...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 4 August 2006Ethical review of non-commercial clinical trialsShow More
Dear Editor,
Sheard et al. are right to raise awareness regarding the practicality of the ‘approvals process’ for non-commercial clinical trials and the duplicative application process that often involves research governance, ethics, the research sponsor and, for trials involving medicinal products, the MHRA. This can indeed be a time-consuming and often frustrating process. I would, however, like to respond to a num...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared.
Other content recommended for you
- Ethical approval for research involving geographically dispersed subjects: unsuitability of the UK MREC/LREC system and relevance to uncommon genetic disorders
- The ESRC research ethics framework and research ethics review at UK universities: rebuilding the Tower of Babel REC by REC
- Using the Clinical Research Network for psychosocial cancer research: lessons learned from two observational studies
- Streamlined research governance: are we there yet?
- Regulation—the real threat to clinical research
- Prisoners as research participants: current practice and attitudes in the UK
- The effect of the neonatal Continuous Negative Extrathoracic Pressure (CNEP) trial enquiries on research in the UK
- The experiences of ethics committee members: contradictions between individuals and committees
- Falling research in the NHS
- Determining the need for ethical review: a three-stage Delphi study