Status of registration, re-registration, and accreditation of ethics committees with Central Drugs Standard Control Organization, Department of Health Research, and National Accreditation Board for Hospitals and Healthcare Providers - An evaluation of the extent of ethics oversight in the country.

Q2 Medicine
Perspectives in Clinical Research Pub Date : 2025-07-01 Epub Date: 2025-05-31 DOI:10.4103/picr.picr_184_24
Ananya Rakshit, Karan Muzumdar, Nithya Jaideep Gogtay, Yashodhan Desai, Urmila Mukund Thatte
{"title":"Status of registration, re-registration, and accreditation of ethics committees with Central Drugs Standard Control Organization, Department of Health Research, and National Accreditation Board for Hospitals and Healthcare Providers - An evaluation of the extent of ethics oversight in the country.","authors":"Ananya Rakshit, Karan Muzumdar, Nithya Jaideep Gogtay, Yashodhan Desai, Urmila Mukund Thatte","doi":"10.4103/picr.picr_184_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>The \"New Drugs and Clinical Trials Rules 2019\" mandates that Ethics Committees (ECs) register with the Central Drugs Standard Control Organization (CDSCO), while ECs overseeing Postgraduate (PG) theses and academic studies must register with the Department of Health Research (DHR). National Accreditation Board for Hospitals and Healthcare Providers (NABH) accreditation of ECs is currently optional.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To evaluate the current status of EC registration and re-registration with CDSCO, DHR and accreditation of NABH as a metric of ethical oversight.</p><p><strong>Subjects and methods: </strong>Data from January 1, 2019, to September 30, 2022 were collected from the organizational websites and the National Medical Commission (NMC). Registration and re-registration data for ECs were matched against the volume of studies in the Clinical Trials Registry India (CTRI), the number of ECs per state, and state populations. Descriptive and inferential statistics were applied.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 770 ECs registered with CDSCO, 38.3% were reregistered. Of the 977 DHR-registered ECs, only 17% were re-registered. Among 370 NMC-recognized PG medical institutes, 49.72% had DHR-registered ECs. Only 13% (186/1400) ECs were NABH accredited from the overall data. A total of 14,551 regulatory studies were registered with CTRI. Among the major states (>4% of Indian population), Maharashtra had the highest percentage of CDSCO-registered ECs at 20% and accounted for 14% of regulatory studies, while states such as Bihar and West Bengal had lower percentages of both CDSCO registered ECs and regulatory studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The registration, re-registration status of ECs, and accreditation are not commensurate with the quantum of regulatory and academic studies in the country.</p>","PeriodicalId":20015,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives in Clinical Research","volume":"16 3","pages":"150-155"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12288913/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives in Clinical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/picr.picr_184_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Context: The "New Drugs and Clinical Trials Rules 2019" mandates that Ethics Committees (ECs) register with the Central Drugs Standard Control Organization (CDSCO), while ECs overseeing Postgraduate (PG) theses and academic studies must register with the Department of Health Research (DHR). National Accreditation Board for Hospitals and Healthcare Providers (NABH) accreditation of ECs is currently optional.

Aim: To evaluate the current status of EC registration and re-registration with CDSCO, DHR and accreditation of NABH as a metric of ethical oversight.

Subjects and methods: Data from January 1, 2019, to September 30, 2022 were collected from the organizational websites and the National Medical Commission (NMC). Registration and re-registration data for ECs were matched against the volume of studies in the Clinical Trials Registry India (CTRI), the number of ECs per state, and state populations. Descriptive and inferential statistics were applied.

Results: Of the 770 ECs registered with CDSCO, 38.3% were reregistered. Of the 977 DHR-registered ECs, only 17% were re-registered. Among 370 NMC-recognized PG medical institutes, 49.72% had DHR-registered ECs. Only 13% (186/1400) ECs were NABH accredited from the overall data. A total of 14,551 regulatory studies were registered with CTRI. Among the major states (>4% of Indian population), Maharashtra had the highest percentage of CDSCO-registered ECs at 20% and accounted for 14% of regulatory studies, while states such as Bihar and West Bengal had lower percentages of both CDSCO registered ECs and regulatory studies.

Conclusion: The registration, re-registration status of ECs, and accreditation are not commensurate with the quantum of regulatory and academic studies in the country.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

伦理委员会在中央药品标准控制组织、卫生研究部和国家医院和医疗保健提供者认证委员会的注册、再注册和认证状况——对该国伦理监督程度的评估。
背景:“2019年新药和临床试验规则”要求伦理委员会(ec)在中央药物标准控制组织(CDSCO)注册,而监督研究生(PG)论文和学术研究的ec必须在卫生研究部(DHR)注册。国家医院和医疗保健提供者认证委员会(NABH)对ec的认证目前是可选的。目的:评估EC在CDSCO、DHR和NABH认证中注册和重新注册的现状,作为道德监督的衡量标准。对象和方法:2019年1月1日至2022年9月30日的数据收集于各组织网站和国家医学委员会(NMC)。ECs的注册和再注册数据与印度临床试验登记处(CTRI)的研究数量、每个邦的ECs数量和邦人口进行匹配。采用描述性统计和推理统计。结果:在CDSCO登记的770例ECs中,38.3%的ECs重新登记。在977个dhr登记的ec中,只有17%重新登记。在370家nmc认可的PG医疗机构中,49.72%拥有dhr注册的ec。从整体数据来看,只有13%(186/1400)的ECs获得了NABH认证。共有14,551项规管研究在CTRI注册。在主要邦(占印度人口的4%)中,马哈拉施特拉邦的CDSCO注册ec比例最高,为20%,占监管研究的14%,而比哈尔邦和西孟加拉邦等邦的CDSCO注册ec和监管研究的比例都较低。结论:ECs的注册、再注册状态和认证与国内监管和学术研究的数量不相称。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Perspectives in Clinical Research
Perspectives in Clinical Research Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
41
审稿时长
36 weeks
期刊介绍: This peer review quarterly journal is positioned to build a learning clinical research community in India. This scientific journal will have a broad coverage of topics across clinical research disciplines including clinical research methodology, research ethics, clinical data management, training, data management, biostatistics, regulatory and will include original articles, reviews, news and views, perspectives, and other interesting sections. PICR will offer all clinical research stakeholders in India – academicians, ethics committees, regulators, and industry professionals -a forum for exchange of ideas, information and opinions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信