Ethical and research governance approval across Europe: Experiences from three European palliative care studies
- Resource Type
- Authors
- Sheila Payne; Agnes van der Heide; Marieke Groot; Francesca Ingravallo; Jeroen Hasselaar; Nancy Preston; Johannes J. M. van Delden; Lieve Van den Block; Lesley Dunleavy; Ágnes Csikós; Sean Hughes
- Source
- Palliative Medicine, 34, 817-821
Palliative Medicine, 34, 6, pp. 817-821
PALLIATIVE MEDICINE
Palliative Medicine, 34(6):0269216320908774, 817-821. SAGE Publications Ltd
Palliative Medicine
- Subject
- Time Factors
Scrutiny
Palliative care
Data management
education
Short Report
research governance
European studies
Healthcare improvement science Radboud Institute for Health Sciences [Radboudumc 18]
03 medical and health sciences
0302 clinical medicine
030502 gerontology
Medicine and Health Sciences
Humans
Medicine
030212 general & internal medicine
Ethic
Ethics
Medical education
Research ethics
palliative care
Descriptive statistics
business.industry
Corporate governance
Clinical Studies as Topic
General Medicine
United Kingdom
Europe
Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
Principal (commercial law)
clinical trial as topic
surveys and questionnaires
Quality of Life
COMMITTEES
0305 other medical science
business
Ethics Committees, Research
- Language
- ISSN
- 0269-2163
1477-030X
Background: Research requires high-quality ethical and governance scrutiny and approval. However, when research is conducted across different countries, this can cause challenges due to the differing ethico-legal framework requirements of ethical boards. There is no specific guidance for research which does not involve non-medicinal products. Aim: To describe and address differences in ethical and research governance procedures applied by research ethics committees for non-pharmaceutical palliative care studies including adult participants in collaborative European studies. Design: An online survey analysed using descriptive statistics. Setting/participants: Eighteen principal investigators in 11 countries conducting one of three European-funded studies. Results: There was variation in practice including whether ethical approval was required. The time to gain full approvals differed with the United Kingdom having governance procedures that took the longest time. Written consent was not required in all countries nor were data safety monitoring committees for trials. There were additional differences in relation to other data management issues. Conclusion: Researchers need to take the differences in research approval procedures into account when planning studies. Future research is needed to establish European-wide recommendations for policy and practice that dovetail ethical procedures and enhance transnational research collaborations.