Reporting ethical approval in case reports and case series in 12 consecutive years: A systematic review

Linh Tran, Vuong Thanh Huan, Luu Lam Thang Tai, Adnan Safi, Moustafa ElBadry Ahmed, Mohamed Osman Algazar, Sedighe Karimzadeh, Nguyen Vinh Khang, Nguyen Hai Nam, Zaheer Ahmad Qureshi, Nguyen Lam Vuong, Le Huu Nhat Minh, Nguyen Tien Huy
{"title":"Reporting ethical approval in case reports and case series in 12 consecutive years: A systematic review","authors":"Linh Tran,&nbsp;Vuong Thanh Huan,&nbsp;Luu Lam Thang Tai,&nbsp;Adnan Safi,&nbsp;Moustafa ElBadry Ahmed,&nbsp;Mohamed Osman Algazar,&nbsp;Sedighe Karimzadeh,&nbsp;Nguyen Vinh Khang,&nbsp;Nguyen Hai Nam,&nbsp;Zaheer Ahmad Qureshi,&nbsp;Nguyen Lam Vuong,&nbsp;Le Huu Nhat Minh,&nbsp;Nguyen Tien Huy","doi":"10.1002/hcs2.113","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Our study describes the reported rate of the Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, declaration of Helsinki (DoH), and informed consent in the case reports and case series and investigates factors associated with the ethical approval report. We searched PubMed for case reports and case series from 2006 to 2017. Annually, we obtained the first 20 articles of a case report cluster from 20 distinct publications. This analysis initially contained at least 2400 papers, with 100 papers each study design and year. Only 26 (5.4%) of 480 included studies reported IRB approval, DoH approval, and participant informed consent; 58 (12.1%) reported two out of three ethical statements (DoH, informed consent, IRB); and 151 (31.5%) reported only one, leading to nearly 245 studies (51.0%) did not report any ethical approval item. Both clusters mentioned the DoH the least. Only years, ages, ethical item types, and cluster types were associated with ethical reporting practices. This study found the serious under-reporting of ethical practices in both case reports and case series.</p>","PeriodicalId":100601,"journal":{"name":"Health Care Science","volume":"3 5","pages":"298-311"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11520241/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Care Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hcs2.113","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Our study describes the reported rate of the Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, declaration of Helsinki (DoH), and informed consent in the case reports and case series and investigates factors associated with the ethical approval report. We searched PubMed for case reports and case series from 2006 to 2017. Annually, we obtained the first 20 articles of a case report cluster from 20 distinct publications. This analysis initially contained at least 2400 papers, with 100 papers each study design and year. Only 26 (5.4%) of 480 included studies reported IRB approval, DoH approval, and participant informed consent; 58 (12.1%) reported two out of three ethical statements (DoH, informed consent, IRB); and 151 (31.5%) reported only one, leading to nearly 245 studies (51.0%) did not report any ethical approval item. Both clusters mentioned the DoH the least. Only years, ages, ethical item types, and cluster types were associated with ethical reporting practices. This study found the serious under-reporting of ethical practices in both case reports and case series.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
连续 12 年在病例报告和系列病例中报告伦理批准:系统回顾。
我们的研究描述了病例报告和系列病例中机构审查委员会(IRB)批准、赫尔辛基宣言(DoH)和知情同意书的报告率,并调查了与伦理批准报告相关的因素。我们在 PubMed 上检索了 2006 年至 2017 年的病例报告和系列病例。每年,我们从 20 个不同的出版物中获取病例报告集群的前 20 篇文章。这项分析最初至少包含 2400 篇论文,每个研究设计和年份各包含 100 篇论文。在纳入的 480 项研究中,只有 26 项(5.4%)报告了 IRB 批准、DoH 批准和参与者知情同意;58 项(12.1%)报告了三项伦理声明中的两项(DoH、知情同意、IRB);151 项(31.5%)只报告了一项,导致近 245 项研究(51.0%)未报告任何伦理批准项目。这两组研究都最少提及卫生部。只有年份、年龄、伦理项目类型和群组类型与伦理报告实践相关。本研究发现,病例报告和系列病例中的伦理实践报告严重不足。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Study protocol: A national cross-sectional study on psychology and behavior investigation of Chinese residents in 2023. Caregiving in Asia: Priority areas for research, policy, and practice to support family caregivers. Innovative public strategies in response to COVID-19: A review of practices from China. Sixty years of ethical evolution: The 2024 revision of the Declaration of Helsinki (DoH). A novel ensemble ARIMA-LSTM approach for evaluating COVID-19 cases and future outbreak preparedness.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1