Better Mechanisms Are Needed to Oversee HREC Reviews. (2nd September 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Eckstein, Lisa; McWhirter, Rebekah; Stewart, Cameron
• Is Part Of: Public health ethics. Volume 15:Number 2(2022)
• Page Start: 200
• Page End: 203
• Publication Date: 2022-09-02
• Subjects: Medical policy -- Moral and ethical aspects -- Periodicals; Public health -- Moral and ethical aspects -- Periodicals; 174.205
• DOI: 10.1093/phe/phac010
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1754-9973

Abstract

Abstract: Hawe et al . raise concerns about Human Research Ethics Committees (HRECs) taking a risk-averse and litigation-sensitive approach to ethical review of research proposals. HRECs are tasked with reviewing proposals for compliance with the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research for the purpose of promoting the welfare of participants. While these guidelines intentionally include a significant degree of discretion in HREC decision making, there is also evidence that HRECs sometimes request changes that go beyond the guidance provided by the National Statement . When HRECs request changes outside their remit, inconsistencies between individual HRECs become more common, contributing to delays in ethical review and reducing the quality of HREC decision making. Improvements to the HREC regulatory system are needed to promote transparency and accountability.