• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

卫生部的研究治理框架仍然是多中心研究的一个障碍:一项全国性描述性研究的结果

The Department of Health's research governance framework remains an impediment to multi-centre studies: findings from a national descriptive study.

作者信息

Kielmann Tara, Tierney Alison, Porteous Rosemary, Huby Guro, Sheikh Aziz, Pinnock Hilary

机构信息

Division of Community Health Sciences, GP Section, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, EH8 9DX, UK.

出版信息

J R Soc Med. 2007 May;100(5):234-8. doi: 10.1177/014107680710000513.

DOI:10.1177/014107680710000513
PMID:17470931
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1861420/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

We describe our experience of using the standard application form, designed to streamline applications for multi-centre research, to seek approval from all primary care organizations (PCOs) in England and Wales to undertake a single telephone interview with a health service manager.

DESIGN

We sent applications (n=316), by email to each PCO, or consortium of PCOs, attaching a completed standard application form, the 15 required documents, and the approval we had been granted by the lead NHS organization. We maintained detailed records of the responses to our application, subsequent correspondence, additional paperwork requested, and time spent on the approval process.

SETTING

The UK Research Governance Framework, which regulates all research conducted in health and social care settings.

PARTICIPANTS

All PCOs in England and Wales.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Time taken to obtain approval to undertake a telephone interview with a health service manager.

RESULTS

We were unable to establish contact with 13 (4%) PCOs. Six months after submitting our application we had received approval from 259/316 (82%) PCOs and were still awaiting a verdict from 41 (13%). The median time to approval was 56 days (IQR 42-72). Overall, an estimated 318 staff-hours were spent completing supplementary forms, providing additional information and chasing up dormant applications.

CONCLUSIONS

Recent initiatives to 'streamline' research governance approval have failed to address the problems that face researchers undertaking multi-centre studies. There is an urgent need to develop a simpler process that allows low risk research to take place without threatening staff morale and endangering the quality of the research outputs. In the meantime, we advise researchers to allow far greater time than might reasonably be envisioned to obtain research governance approval.

摘要

目的

我们介绍了使用标准申请表的经验,该申请表旨在简化多中心研究的申请流程,以寻求英格兰和威尔士所有初级保健组织(PCO)批准对一名卫生服务经理进行单次电话访谈。

设计

我们通过电子邮件向每个PCO或PCO联盟发送申请(n = 316份),附上完整的标准申请表、所需的15份文件以及我们获得的英国国家医疗服务体系(NHS)牵头组织的批准。我们详细记录了对申请的回复、后续通信、要求提供的额外文件以及审批过程所花费的时间。

背景

英国研究治理框架,该框架规范了在卫生和社会护理环境中进行的所有研究。

参与者

英格兰和威尔士的所有PCO。

干预措施

无。

主要观察指标

获得批准对一名卫生服务经理进行电话访谈所需的时间。

结果

我们无法与13个(4%)PCO取得联系。提交申请六个月后,我们收到了259/316个(82%)PCO的批准,仍有41个(13%)在等待裁决。批准的中位时间为56天(四分位间距42 - 72天)。总体而言,估计花费了318个工作人员工时来填写补充表格、提供额外信息并跟进停滞的申请。

结论

最近“简化”研究治理批准的举措未能解决进行多中心研究的研究人员面临的问题。迫切需要制定一个更简单的流程,使低风险研究能够进行,同时不影响工作人员士气并危及研究成果的质量。与此同时,我们建议研究人员预留比合理预期长得多的时间来获得研究治理批准。

相似文献

1
The Department of Health's research governance framework remains an impediment to multi-centre studies: findings from a national descriptive study.卫生部的研究治理框架仍然是多中心研究的一个障碍:一项全国性描述性研究的结果
J R Soc Med. 2007 May;100(5):234-8. doi: 10.1177/014107680710000513.
2
Research governance delays for a multicentre non-interventional study.一项多中心非干预性研究的研究管理延迟
J R Soc Med. 2009 May;102(5):195-8. doi: 10.1258/jrsm.2009.080397.
3
Bureaucracy stifles medical research in Britain: a tale of three trials.英国官僚作风扼杀医学研究:三项试验的故事。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012 Aug 16;12:122. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-12-122.
4
Governance approval for multisite, non-interventional research: what can Harmonisation of Multi-Centre Ethical Review learn from the New South Wales experience?多中心、非干预性研究的治理审批:多中心伦理审查协调如何借鉴新南威尔士州的经验?
Intern Med J. 2012 Feb;42(2):127-31. doi: 10.1111/j.1445-5994.2011.02431.x.
5
Ethical issues: the multi-centre low-risk ethics/governance review process and AMOSS.伦理问题:多中心低风险伦理/治理审查流程与AMOSS
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2012 Apr;52(2):195-203. doi: 10.1111/j.1479-828X.2011.01390.x. Epub 2011 Dec 20.
6
Inconsistencies and time delays in site-specific research approvals hinder collaborative clinical research in Australia.澳大利亚特定研究地点审批中的不一致和时间延迟,阻碍了协作性临床研究。
Intern Med J. 2016 Sep;46(9):1023-9. doi: 10.1111/imj.13191.
7
Multi-centre ethics and research governance review can impede non-interventional clinical research.多中心伦理和研究治理审查可能会阻碍非干预性临床研究。
Intern Med J. 2019 Jun;49(6):722-728. doi: 10.1111/imj.14158.
8
Research governance impediments to clinical trials: a retrospective survey.临床试验的研究治理障碍:一项回顾性调查。
J R Soc Med. 2007 Feb;100(2):101-4. doi: 10.1177/014107680710000227.
9
Multi-centre research in Australia: analysis of a recent National Health and Medical Research Council-funded project.澳大利亚的多中心研究:对近期一项由国家卫生与医学研究委员会资助项目的分析
Respirology. 2009 Sep;14(7):1051-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1843.2009.01595.x.
10
Delays and diversity in the practice of local research ethics committees.当地研究伦理委员会实践中的延迟与多样性。
J Med Ethics. 1996 Oct;22(5):263-6. doi: 10.1136/jme.22.5.263.

引用本文的文献

1
Design and implementation of a large and complex trial in emergency medical services.紧急医疗服务中大型复杂试验的设计与实施
Trials. 2019 Feb 8;20(1):108. doi: 10.1186/s13063-019-3203-0.
2
From awareness to involvement? A qualitative study of respiratory patients' awareness of health service change.从意识转变为参与?一项关于呼吸疾病患者对卫生服务变革意识的定性研究。
Health Expect. 2011 Sep;14(3):321-33. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2010.00631.x. Epub 2010 Oct 28.
3
Ethics review as a component of institutional approval for a multicentre continuous quality improvement project: the investigator's perspective.伦理审查作为多中心持续质量改进项目机构批准的组成部分:研究者的观点。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2010 Jul 30;10:223. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-10-223.
4
One stop or full stop? The continuing challenges for researchers despite the new streamlined NHS research governance process.一站还是全停?尽管新的简化 NHS 研究治理流程已经实施,但研究人员仍面临持续挑战。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2010 May 13;10:124. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-10-124.
5
How the NHS research governance procedures could be modified to greatly strengthen clinical research.如何修改 NHS 研究治理程序以极大地加强临床研究。
Clin Med (Lond). 2010 Apr;10(2):127-9. doi: 10.7861/clinmedicine.10-2-127.
6
Is multidisciplinary teamwork the key? A qualitative study of the development of respiratory services in the UK.多学科团队合作是关键吗?对英国呼吸服务发展的定性研究。
J R Soc Med. 2009 Sep;102(9):378-90. doi: 10.1258/jrsm.2009.080356.
7
Health researchers' attitudes towards public involvement in health research.健康研究人员对公众参与健康研究的态度。
Health Expect. 2009 Jun;12(2):209-20. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2009.00532.x. Epub 2009 Apr 22.
8
Mind the gap between policy imperatives and service provision: a qualitative study of the process of respiratory service development in England and Wales.关注政策要求与服务提供之间的差距:对英格兰和威尔士呼吸服务发展过程的定性研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2008 Dec 4;8:248. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-8-248.
9
Regulation and the social licence for medical research.医学研究的监管与社会许可
Med Health Care Philos. 2008 Dec;11(4):381-91. doi: 10.1007/s11019-008-9152-0. Epub 2008 Jul 17.
10
Setting up non-commercial clinical trials takes too long in the UK: findings from a prospective study.在英国开展非商业性临床试验耗时过长:一项前瞻性研究的结果
J R Soc Med. 2008 Jun;101(6):299-304. doi: 10.1258/jrsm.2008.070373.

本文引用的文献

1
Research governance: ethical issues.研究治理:伦理问题。
J R Soc Med. 2006 Feb;99(2):65-72. doi: 10.1177/014107680609900218.
2
Research governance: research governance approval is putting people off research.研究治理:研究治理审批正在让人们对研究望而却步。
BMJ. 2006 Jan 28;332(7535):238. doi: 10.1136/bmj.332.7535.238-a.
3
A critical account of obtaining research governance approval.关于获得研究治理批准的批判性阐述。
Nurse Res. 2005;13(2):7-18. doi: 10.7748/nr.13.2.7.s3.
4
Research governance: regulating risk and reducing harm?研究治理:管控风险与减少危害?
J R Soc Med. 2006 Jan;99(1):14-9. doi: 10.1177/014107680609900109.
5
Researchers' responses to research management and governance for primary care research in England: persistent and escalating problems over time.研究人员对英格兰初级保健研究的研究管理与治理的回应:问题长期存在且不断升级。
J Health Organ Manag. 2005;19(6):494-503. doi: 10.1108/14777260510629698.
6
Research governance: where did it come from, what does it mean?研究治理:它从何而来,意味着什么?
J R Soc Med. 2005 Nov;98(11):496-502. doi: 10.1177/014107680509801110.
7
The negative effect of red tape on research.繁文缛节对研究的负面影响。
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2005 Jun;14(6):373-6. doi: 10.1002/pds.1116.
8
Ethics and research governance in a multicentre study: add 150 days to your study protocol.多中心研究中的伦理与研究治理:在研究方案中增加150天。
BMJ. 2005 Apr 9;330(7495):847. doi: 10.1136/bmj.330.7495.847.
9
Ensuring that research governance supports rather than stifles research.确保研究治理支持而非扼杀研究。
Br J Gen Pract. 2005 Jan;55(510):4-5.
10
Research bureaucracy in the United Kingdom: research governance is about protection, not convenience.英国的科研官僚作风:科研治理关乎保护,而非便利。
BMJ. 2004 Sep 11;329(7466):623. doi: 10.1136/bmj.329.7466.623-b.