Krastev Yordanka, Grimm Michael, Metcalfe Andrew
University of New South Wales.
Monash Bioeth Rev. 2011 Sep;29(4):16.1-7. doi: 10.1007/BF03351330.
Recent revisions of the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research and the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research put a great emphasis on research governance. Institutional responsibility for the governance of the research is not limited only to the ethical review by the Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC), but also to the accountability for quality, safety, privacy, risk management and financial management of the research. Despite the development of proposed research governance frameworks, many Australian institutions do not have such structures in place and rely excessively on HRECs to perform administrative functions that are not their responsibility. In this paper we report on implementation of a research governance framework at University of New South Wales which led to reduced HREC workload and allowed more attention to its core functions. We present the approach undertaken by the university to separate the ethical review process by HREC from the research governance. We recommend that with proper research governance frameworks in place, the role of HRECs and the institutional responsibility of governance of the research can be defined clearly.
最近对《国家人类研究伦理行为声明》和《澳大利亚研究责任行为准则》的修订极大地强调了研究治理。机构对研究治理的责任不仅限于人类研究伦理委员会(HREC)的伦理审查,还包括对研究的质量、安全、隐私、风险管理和财务管理的问责。尽管提出了研究治理框架,但许多澳大利亚机构并未建立此类结构,而是过度依赖HREC来履行其不应承担的行政职能。在本文中,我们报告了新南威尔士大学研究治理框架的实施情况,该框架减少了HREC的工作量,并使其能够更多地关注其核心职能。我们介绍了该大学将HREC的伦理审查过程与研究治理分开的方法。我们建议,建立适当的研究治理框架后,可以明确HREC的作用以及研究治理的机构责任。