未报告的方案偏差-研究冰山一角。

Q2 Medicine Perspectives in Clinical Research Pub Date : 2023-04-01 Epub Date: 2022-12-21 DOI:10.4103/picr.picr_235_21
Uma Kulkarni, Ravi Vaswani, Mohammed Guthigar, Nagapati Bhat, Laxminarayan Sonde
{"title":"未报告的方案偏差-研究冰山一角。","authors":"Uma Kulkarni,&nbsp;Ravi Vaswani,&nbsp;Mohammed Guthigar,&nbsp;Nagapati Bhat,&nbsp;Laxminarayan Sonde","doi":"10.4103/picr.picr_235_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Failure to stay within an ethics committee (EC)-approved protocol limits is termed protocol deviation or violation (PD/PV), depending on the seriousness of the transgression and its attendant risks and/or harms. PD/PVs arise in the post-approval phase of the research and are often missed. Current guidelines expect ECs to detect, report and recommend suitable actions such that research participants' risks and harms are mitigated, to the extent possible.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Yenepoya Ethics Committee-1 conducted an internal audit of ongoing postgraduate dissertations involving human participants to assess the occurrence of PD/PVs.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>54 out of 80 postgraduates responded to our request for filling out a self-reported checklist. These responses were followed up with physical verification of the protocol-related documents.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Protocol transgressions were classified as non-compliance (administrative issues), protocol deviations (minor transgressions with minimal or less than minimal increase in attendant risk to participants) and protocol violations (serious transgressions with more than minimal increase in attendant risk to participants). The non-compliances included non-reporting for audit and non-reporting of PDs. Protocol deviations included non-conformance to EC validity, sample size, approved methodology, informed consent process and documentation and suboptimal data storage. No protocol violations were observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We report PD/PVs from these 54 protocols - with our assessment on the negative impact it may have on scientific validity, harm to participants, EC functioning and credibility of the institution - in the hope that our readers appreciate this important aspect of the post-approval process in the functioning of an EC.</p>","PeriodicalId":20015,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives in Clinical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/74/81/PCR-14-68.PMC10267994.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Unreported protocol deviations - The tip of the research-berg.\",\"authors\":\"Uma Kulkarni,&nbsp;Ravi Vaswani,&nbsp;Mohammed Guthigar,&nbsp;Nagapati Bhat,&nbsp;Laxminarayan Sonde\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/picr.picr_235_21\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Failure to stay within an ethics committee (EC)-approved protocol limits is termed protocol deviation or violation (PD/PV), depending on the seriousness of the transgression and its attendant risks and/or harms. PD/PVs arise in the post-approval phase of the research and are often missed. Current guidelines expect ECs to detect, report and recommend suitable actions such that research participants' risks and harms are mitigated, to the extent possible.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Yenepoya Ethics Committee-1 conducted an internal audit of ongoing postgraduate dissertations involving human participants to assess the occurrence of PD/PVs.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>54 out of 80 postgraduates responded to our request for filling out a self-reported checklist. These responses were followed up with physical verification of the protocol-related documents.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Protocol transgressions were classified as non-compliance (administrative issues), protocol deviations (minor transgressions with minimal or less than minimal increase in attendant risk to participants) and protocol violations (serious transgressions with more than minimal increase in attendant risk to participants). The non-compliances included non-reporting for audit and non-reporting of PDs. Protocol deviations included non-conformance to EC validity, sample size, approved methodology, informed consent process and documentation and suboptimal data storage. No protocol violations were observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We report PD/PVs from these 54 protocols - with our assessment on the negative impact it may have on scientific validity, harm to participants, EC functioning and credibility of the institution - in the hope that our readers appreciate this important aspect of the post-approval process in the functioning of an EC.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20015,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Perspectives in Clinical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/74/81/PCR-14-68.PMC10267994.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Perspectives in Clinical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/picr.picr_235_21\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/12/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives in Clinical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/picr.picr_235_21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/12/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

引言:未能遵守伦理委员会(EC)批准的协议限制被称为协议偏离或违反(PD/PV),这取决于违规的严重性及其伴随的风险和/或危害。PD/PV出现在研究的批准后阶段,经常被遗漏。目前的指导方针要求EC检测、报告并建议适当的行动,以便尽可能减轻研究参与者的风险和伤害。目的:Yenepoya伦理委员会-1对正在进行的涉及人类参与者的研究生学位论文进行了内部审计,以评估PD/PV的发生情况。材料和方法:80名研究生中有54名回应了我们填写自我报告清单的请求。在这些答复之后,对方案相关文件进行了实物核查。结果:违反协议分为不遵守(行政问题)、违反协议(轻微违规,参与者的伴随风险增加最小或小于最小)和违反协议(严重违规,参与者伴随风险增加大于最小)。不合规行为包括未报告审计和未报告PD。方案偏差包括不符合EC有效性、样本量、批准的方法、知情同意程序和文件以及次优数据存储。未发现任何违反协议的行为。结论:我们报告了这54项协议中的PD/PV,并评估了它可能对科学有效性、对参与者的伤害、欧盟委员会的运作和机构的可信度产生的负面影响,希望我们的读者能够理解欧盟委员会运作中批准后过程的这一重要方面。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Unreported protocol deviations - The tip of the research-berg.

Introduction: Failure to stay within an ethics committee (EC)-approved protocol limits is termed protocol deviation or violation (PD/PV), depending on the seriousness of the transgression and its attendant risks and/or harms. PD/PVs arise in the post-approval phase of the research and are often missed. Current guidelines expect ECs to detect, report and recommend suitable actions such that research participants' risks and harms are mitigated, to the extent possible.

Objective: Yenepoya Ethics Committee-1 conducted an internal audit of ongoing postgraduate dissertations involving human participants to assess the occurrence of PD/PVs.

Materials and methods: 54 out of 80 postgraduates responded to our request for filling out a self-reported checklist. These responses were followed up with physical verification of the protocol-related documents.

Results: Protocol transgressions were classified as non-compliance (administrative issues), protocol deviations (minor transgressions with minimal or less than minimal increase in attendant risk to participants) and protocol violations (serious transgressions with more than minimal increase in attendant risk to participants). The non-compliances included non-reporting for audit and non-reporting of PDs. Protocol deviations included non-conformance to EC validity, sample size, approved methodology, informed consent process and documentation and suboptimal data storage. No protocol violations were observed.

Conclusion: We report PD/PVs from these 54 protocols - with our assessment on the negative impact it may have on scientific validity, harm to participants, EC functioning and credibility of the institution - in the hope that our readers appreciate this important aspect of the post-approval process in the functioning of an EC.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Perspectives in Clinical Research
Perspectives in Clinical Research Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
41
审稿时长
36 weeks
期刊介绍: This peer review quarterly journal is positioned to build a learning clinical research community in India. This scientific journal will have a broad coverage of topics across clinical research disciplines including clinical research methodology, research ethics, clinical data management, training, data management, biostatistics, regulatory and will include original articles, reviews, news and views, perspectives, and other interesting sections. PICR will offer all clinical research stakeholders in India – academicians, ethics committees, regulators, and industry professionals -a forum for exchange of ideas, information and opinions.
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of student-led “Association for Support and Propagation of Innovation, Research, and Education” (A.S.P.I.R.E) in empowering undergraduate medical students in research: A 2-year longitudinal study Pleiotropic effect of teneligliptin versus glimepiride add-on therapy on hs-CRP and cardiorenal parameters in Indian type 2 diabetes patients: An open-labeled randomized controlled trial Efficacy and safety of quick penetrating solution heparin, quick penetrating solution diclofenac, and heparin gel in the prevention of infusion-associated superficial thrombophlebitis: A randomized controlled trial Bio-entrepreneurs’ bugbear: Regulatory rigmarole Experience of participating in community-based clinical trials from rural Maharashtra: Analysis of over 4000 participant feedback forms
×
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