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, Ravi Vaswani, Mohammed Guthigar, Nagapati Bhat, 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, Ravi Vaswani, Mohammed Guthigar, Nagapati Bhat, 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}
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.
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.