Abstract
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.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allen, G. 2007. Mind the gap: Griffith University’s approach to the governance of ethical conduct in human research. Monash Bioethics Review 26(1–2): 57–67.
Anderson, W; Cordner, C; Breen, K. 2006. Strengthening Australia’s framework for research oversight. Medical Journal of Australia 184(6): 261–63.
Babl, F. E; Sharwood, L. N. 2008. Research governance: current knowledge among clinical researchers. Medical Journal of Australia 188(11) (June): 649–52.
Bloom, G. S; Frew, D. 2008. Regulation of research through research governance: within and beyond NSW Health. NSW Public Health Bulletin 19(11–12): 199–202.
Chalmers, D. 2002. The expectation gap, risk management and the Australian HREC system. Monash Bioethics Review 21(3): 49–57.
Frew, D; Martlew, A. 2007. A. Research governance: new hope for ethics committees? Monash Bioethics Review 26(1–2): 17–23.
Hicks, S.C; James, R.E; Wong, N; Tebbutt, N.C; Wilson, K. 2009. A case study evaluation of ethics review systems for multicentre clinical trials. Medical Journal of Australia 191(5): 280–2.
Loblay, R. 2008. Human research ethics — a work in progress. Medical Journal of Australia 188(11) (June): 628–29.
NHMRC. 2008. Harmonisation of Multi-centre Ethical Review (HoMER). Canberra: Australian Government. Available from: http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/health_ethics/homer/index.htm.
NHMRC. 2010a. Overview of Human Research Ethics Committees (HRECs). Available from: http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/health_ethics/hrecs/overview.htm [viewed 28 February 2011]
NHMRC. 2010b. Understanding Research Governance of Multi-centre Human Research Discussion Paper. Available from: http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/health_ethics/homer/homer_consult.htm.
NHMRC; ARC; AVCC. 2007a. National statement on ethical conduct in human research. Canberra: Australian Government.
NHMRC; ARC; Universities Australia. 2007b. Australian code for the responsible conduct of research:.Revision of the joint NHMRC/AVCC statement and guidelines on research practice. Canberra: Australian Government.
Poustie, S; Taylor, D; Forbes, A; Skiba, M; Nelson, M; McNeil, J. 2006. Implementing a research governance framework for clinical and public health research. Medical Journal of Australia 185(11–12): 623–6.
UNSW. 2010. Operations Manual for the Human Research Ethics Committees (HRECs). Available from: http://www.gmo.unsw.edu.au/Ethics/HumanEthics/InformationForApplicants/ProformasTemplates/HREC_Operations_Manual_v2.9_final.pdf.
Walsh, M. K; McNeil, J. J; Breen, K. J. 2005. Improving governance of health research. Medical Journal of Australia. 182(9) (May): 468–71.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Krastev, Y., Grimm, M. & Metcalfe, A. Research Governance and Change in Research Ethics Practices at a Major Australian University. Monash Bioethics Review 29, 49–55 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03351330
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03351330