Research Ethics Committees in the UK—the Pressure is Now on Research and Development Departments

Dziak K. , Anderson R. , Sevick M.A. , Weisman C.S. , Levine D.W. , Scholle S.H. Variations among Institutional Review Board reviews in a multisite health services research study. Health Serv Res 2005; 40: 279–90

Gold J.L. , Dewa C.S. Institutional review boards and multisite studies in health services research: is there a better way? Health Serv Res 2005; 40: 291–307

Sarson-Lawrence M. , Alt C. , Mok M.T. , Dodds M. , Rosenthal M.A. Trust and confidence: towards mutual acceptance of ethics committee approval of multicentre studies. Intern Med J 2004; 34: 598–603

Department of Health. Report of the Ad Hoc Advisory Group on the Operation of NHS Research Ethics Committees (268110). London: Department of Health, 2005

Department of Health. Local Research Ethics Committees (HSG(91)5). London: Department of Health, 1991

Holley S. , Foster C. Ethical review of multi-centre research: a survey of local research ethics committees in the south Thames region. J R Coll Phys Lond 1998; 32: 238–41

Hotopf M. , Wessely S. , Noah N. Are ethical committees reliable? J R Soc Med 1995; 88: 31–3

Harries U.J. , Fentem P.H. , Tuxworth W. , Hoinville G.W. Local research ethics committees. Widely differing responses to a national survey protocol. J R Coll Phys Lond 1994; 28: 150–4

Busby A. , Dolk H. Local research ethics committees’ approval in a national population study. J R Coll Phys Lond 1998; 32: 142–5

Garfield P. Cross district comparison of applications to research ethics committees. BMJ 1995; 311: 660–1

While A.E. Research ethics committees at work: the experience of one multi-location study. J Med Ethics 1996; 22: 352–5

Redshaw M.E. , Harris A. , Baum J.D. Research ethics committee audit: differences between committees. J Med Ethics 1996; 22: 78–82

Black M. , Leese B. , Gosden T. Local research ethics committees: differences in application process cause problems. BMJ 1995; 311: 1572

Middle C. , Johnson A. , Petty T. , Sims L. , Macfarlane A. Ethics approval for a national postal survey: recent experience. BMJ 1995; 311: 659–60

Ahmed A.H. , Nicholson K.G. Delays and diversity in the practice of local research ethics committees. J Med Ethics 1996; 22: 263–6

Foster C. , Holley S. Ethical review of multi-centre research: a survey of multi-centre researchers in the South Thames region. J R Coll Phys Lond 1998; 32: 242–5

Ah-See K.W. , MacKenzie J. , Thakker N.S. , Maran A.G. Local research ethics committee approval for a national study in Scotland. J R Coll Surg Edin 1998; 43: 303–5

Penn Z.J. , Steer P.J. Local research ethics committees: hindrance or help? Br J Obst Gynaecol 1995; 102: 1–2

Glasziou P. , Chalmers I. Ethics review roulette: what can we learn? BMJ 2004; 328: 121–2

Benster R. , Pollock A.M. Guidelines for local research ethics committees: distinguishing between patient and population research in the Multicentre Research Project. Public Health 1993; 107: 3–7

Alberti K.G. Local research ethics committees. BMJ 1995; 311: 639–40

NHS Executive. Ethics committee review of multi-centre research (HSG(97)23). London: NHSE, 1997

Palmer A.J.M. Research ethics committee update. Bull Med Ethics 1998; 138: 13–15

Larcombe I. , Mott M. Multicentre research ethics committees: have they helped? J R Soc Med 1999; 92: 500–1

Al-Shahi R. , Warlow C.P. Ethical review of a multicentre study in Scotland: a weighty problem. J R Coll Phys Lond 1999; 33: 549–52

Tully J. , Ninis N. , Booy R. , Viner R. The new system of review by multicentre research ethics committees: prospective study. BMJ 2000; 320: 1179–82

Lux A.L. , Edwards S.W. , Osborne J.P. Responses of local research ethics committees to a study with approval from a multicentre research ethics committee. BMJ 2000; 320: 1182–3

Flynn S. , Dixon C. , Amos T. , Appleby L. The cost of getting approval. BMJ 2000; 320: 1183

Nicholl J. The ethics of research ethics committees. BMJ 2000; 320: 1217

Lewis J.C. , Tomkins S. , Sampson J.R. Ethical approval for research involving geographically dispersed subjects: unsuitability of the UK MREC/LREC system and relevance to uncommon genetic disorders. J Med Ethics 2001; 27: 347–51

Maskell N.A. , Jones E.L. , Davies R.J.O. Variations in experience in obtaining local ethical approval for participation in a multi-centre study. Q J Med 2003; 96: 305–7

Stacey T.E. Ethical review of research in the NHS: the need for change. J R Coll Phys Lond 1998; 32: 190–2

Alberti K.G. Multicentre research ethics committees: has the cure been worse than the disease? BMJ 2000; 320: 1157–8

Blunt J. , Savulescu J. , Watson A.J. Meeting the challenges facing research ethics committees: some practical suggestions. BMJ 1998; 316: 58–61

Warnock M. A national ethics committee. BMJ 1988; 297: 1626–7

Boyce M. Observational study of 353 applications to London multicentre research ethics committee 1997-2000. BMJ 2002; 325: 1081

Jamrozik K. Research ethics paperwork: what is the plot we seem to have lost? BMJ 2004; 329: 286–7

Wald D.S. Bureaucracy of ethics applications. BMJ 2004; 329: 282–4

Cave E. , Holm S. New governance arrangements for research ethics committees: is facilitating research achieved at the cost of participants’ interest? J Med Ethics 2002; 28: 318–21

Warlow C.P. , Al-Shahi R. Differentiating between audit and research. Undue protection of patient confidentiality jeopardises both research and audit. BMJ 2000; 320: 713

Al-Shahi R. , Warlow C. Using patient-identifiable data for observational research and audit. BMJ 2000; 321: 1031–2

Martyn C. The ethical bureaucracy. Q J Med 2003; 96: 323–4

Gilman R.H. , Anderton C. , Kosek M. , Garcia H.H. , Evans C.A. How many committees does it take to make a project ethical? Lancet 2002; 360: 1025–6

Hearnshaw H. Comparison of requirements of research ethics committees in 11 European countries for a non-invasive interventional study. BMJ 2004; 328: 140–1