{"title":"Health research ethics review and needs of institutional ethics committees in Tanzania.","authors":"J K B Ikingura, M Kruger, W Zeleke","doi":"10.4314/thrb.v9i3.14320","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study was undertaken to describe the performance of health research ethics review procedures of six research centres in Tanzania. Data collection was done through a self-administered questionnaire and personal interviews. The results showed that there were on average 11 members (range = 8-14) in each Research Ethic Committee. However, female representation in the committees was low (15.2%). The largest proportion of the committee members was biomedical scientists (51.5%). Others included medical doctors (19.7%), social scientists (7.6%), laboratory technologists (10.6%), religious leaders (4.5%), statisticians (3.0%), teachers (1.5%) and lawyers (1.5). Committee members had different capacities to carry out review of research proposals (no capacity = 2%; limited capacity = 15%; moderate capacity = 20%; good capacity = 48%, excellent capacity = 13%). Only half of the respondents had prior ethics review training. Although the majority deemed that ethical guidelines were very important (66%), there were challenges in the use of ethical guidelines which included lack of awareness on the national accreditation mechanisms for ethics committee (59%). Adherence to ethical principles and regulations was influenced by being a scientist (OR = 42.47), being an employee of a professional organization (OR = 15.25), and having an interests in the use of ethical guidelines (OR = 10.85) These findings indicate the need for capacity strengthening (through training and resource support), inclusion of more female representation and other mandatory professions to the research ethics committees.</p>","PeriodicalId":87458,"journal":{"name":"Tanzania health research bulletin","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4314/thrb.v9i3.14320","citationCount":"23","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tanzania health research bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4314/thrb.v9i3.14320","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 23
Abstract
This study was undertaken to describe the performance of health research ethics review procedures of six research centres in Tanzania. Data collection was done through a self-administered questionnaire and personal interviews. The results showed that there were on average 11 members (range = 8-14) in each Research Ethic Committee. However, female representation in the committees was low (15.2%). The largest proportion of the committee members was biomedical scientists (51.5%). Others included medical doctors (19.7%), social scientists (7.6%), laboratory technologists (10.6%), religious leaders (4.5%), statisticians (3.0%), teachers (1.5%) and lawyers (1.5). Committee members had different capacities to carry out review of research proposals (no capacity = 2%; limited capacity = 15%; moderate capacity = 20%; good capacity = 48%, excellent capacity = 13%). Only half of the respondents had prior ethics review training. Although the majority deemed that ethical guidelines were very important (66%), there were challenges in the use of ethical guidelines which included lack of awareness on the national accreditation mechanisms for ethics committee (59%). Adherence to ethical principles and regulations was influenced by being a scientist (OR = 42.47), being an employee of a professional organization (OR = 15.25), and having an interests in the use of ethical guidelines (OR = 10.85) These findings indicate the need for capacity strengthening (through training and resource support), inclusion of more female representation and other mandatory professions to the research ethics committees.