Experiences of research ethics committee members and scientists of the research protocol review process in Uganda: a case study

Agnes Ssali; Fiona Poland; Janet Seeley

doi:10.1093/inthealth/ihaa047

Experiences of research ethics committee members and scientists of the research protocol review process in Uganda: a case study

Agnes Ssali
, Fiona Poland
, Janet Seeley

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

6 Citations (Scopus)

37 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background:
We investigated how relevant and responsive scientists and research ethics committee (REC) members considered the research protocol review processes for health research practice in Uganda.

Methods:
Interviews were conducted with five scientists and five REC members. Data were analysed thematically.

Results:
How much to compensate for time, the amount of study information shared with volunteers and sample storage for future unknown research were areas of concern for REC members. Delays in getting feedback concerned scientists.

Conclusions:
Researchers and REC members need to hold regular discussions to ensure the review process is relevant and responsive.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	541-542
Number of pages	2
Journal	International Health
Volume	12
Issue number	6
Early online date	9 Nov 2020
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1093/inthealth/ihaa047
Publication status	Published - Nov 2020

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Keywords

Ethics committee
Process
Protocol
Research
Review
Uganda

Access to Document

10.1093/inthealth/ihaa047Licence: CC BY

Published_VersionFinal published version, 146 KBLicence: CC BY

https://academic.oup.com/inthealth/article/12/6/541/5962049Licence: CC BY

Cite this

@article{8e417b8418704f7b8cb3db537de958de,

title = "Experiences of research ethics committee members and scientists of the research protocol review process in Uganda: a case study",

abstract = "Background: We investigated how relevant and responsive scientists and research ethics committee (REC) members considered the research protocol review processes for health research practice in Uganda. Methods: Interviews were conducted with five scientists and five REC members. Data were analysed thematically. Results: How much to compensate for time, the amount of study information shared with volunteers and sample storage for future unknown research were areas of concern for REC members. Delays in getting feedback concerned scientists. Conclusions: Researchers and REC members need to hold regular discussions to ensure the review process is relevant and responsive.",

keywords = "Ethics committee, Process, Protocol, Research, Review, Uganda",

author = "Agnes Ssali and Fiona Poland and Janet Seeley",

year = "2020",

month = nov,

doi = "10.1093/inthealth/ihaa047",

language = "English",

volume = "12",

pages = "541--542",

journal = "International Health",

issn = "1876-3413",

publisher = "Oxford University Press",

number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Experiences of research ethics committee members and scientists of the research protocol review process in Uganda: a case study

AU - Ssali, Agnes

AU - Poland, Fiona

AU - Seeley, Janet

PY - 2020/11

Y1 - 2020/11

N2 - Background: We investigated how relevant and responsive scientists and research ethics committee (REC) members considered the research protocol review processes for health research practice in Uganda. Methods: Interviews were conducted with five scientists and five REC members. Data were analysed thematically. Results: How much to compensate for time, the amount of study information shared with volunteers and sample storage for future unknown research were areas of concern for REC members. Delays in getting feedback concerned scientists. Conclusions: Researchers and REC members need to hold regular discussions to ensure the review process is relevant and responsive.

AB - Background: We investigated how relevant and responsive scientists and research ethics committee (REC) members considered the research protocol review processes for health research practice in Uganda. Methods: Interviews were conducted with five scientists and five REC members. Data were analysed thematically. Results: How much to compensate for time, the amount of study information shared with volunteers and sample storage for future unknown research were areas of concern for REC members. Delays in getting feedback concerned scientists. Conclusions: Researchers and REC members need to hold regular discussions to ensure the review process is relevant and responsive.

KW - Ethics committee

KW - Process

KW - Protocol

KW - Research

KW - Review

KW - Uganda

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85095967113

U2 - 10.1093/inthealth/ihaa047

DO - 10.1093/inthealth/ihaa047

M3 - Article

SN - 1876-3413

VL - 12

SP - 541

EP - 542

JO - International Health

JF - International Health

IS - 6

ER -

Experiences of research ethics committee members and scientists of the research protocol review process in Uganda: a case study

Abstract

UN SDGs

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Profiles

Fiona Poland

Cite this