File(s) under permanent embargo
Better mechanisms are needed to oversee HREC reviews
journal contributionposted on 2023-05-23, 02:01 authored by Lisa EcksteinLisa Eckstein, Rebekah McWhirterRebekah McWhirter, Stewart, C
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.
Publication titlePublic Health Ethics
Department/SchoolFaculty of Law
PublisherOxford University Press
Place of publicationUnited Kingdom