一个新的审计模型评估质量在非监管研究

S. Volsen, M. Masson
{"title":"一个新的审计模型评估质量在非监管研究","authors":"S. Volsen, M. Masson","doi":"10.1002/QAJ.441","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The need for Quality standards in non-regulated research is a matter of considerable current debate. Whilst a number of such guidelines have been developed over recent years, their successful implementation remains a challenge to all. In order to assess whether research standards are indeed improving on the bench following the instigation of such a quality system, a question posed by both senior management and scientists alike, an independent compliance programme is required. However, given the lack of predicate rules, naivety to audit process and general sensitivity to external scrutiny within the scientific ranks, then work in this ‘Grey Area’ generates high exposure for the conventional GLP, GCP or GMP auditor. We have developed, tried, and tested a highly effective, novel audit model for assessing the quality of non-regulated research. This simple system can be applied successfully irrespective of scientific discipline or field. Whilst common principles will always apply during any quality system audit, the refinements and idiosyncrasies we describe here will, as we have found, help underpin success. Our intentional assumption is that this is a first time endeavour for the quality professional. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.","PeriodicalId":147931,"journal":{"name":"Quality Assurance Journal","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A novel audit model for assessing quality in non‐regulated research\",\"authors\":\"S. Volsen, M. Masson\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/QAJ.441\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The need for Quality standards in non-regulated research is a matter of considerable current debate. Whilst a number of such guidelines have been developed over recent years, their successful implementation remains a challenge to all. In order to assess whether research standards are indeed improving on the bench following the instigation of such a quality system, a question posed by both senior management and scientists alike, an independent compliance programme is required. However, given the lack of predicate rules, naivety to audit process and general sensitivity to external scrutiny within the scientific ranks, then work in this ‘Grey Area’ generates high exposure for the conventional GLP, GCP or GMP auditor. We have developed, tried, and tested a highly effective, novel audit model for assessing the quality of non-regulated research. This simple system can be applied successfully irrespective of scientific discipline or field. Whilst common principles will always apply during any quality system audit, the refinements and idiosyncrasies we describe here will, as we have found, help underpin success. Our intentional assumption is that this is a first time endeavour for the quality professional. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.\",\"PeriodicalId\":147931,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quality Assurance Journal\",\"volume\":\"39 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quality Assurance Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/QAJ.441\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality Assurance Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/QAJ.441","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

在不受管制的研究中是否需要质量标准,这是目前争论颇多的一个问题。虽然近年来制定了一些这样的准则,但它们的成功执行仍然是对所有人的挑战。为了评估在这样一个质量体系的推动下,研究标准是否确实得到了提高,这是高级管理人员和科学家都提出的一个问题,需要一个独立的合规计划。然而,由于缺乏谓词规则,审计过程的天真以及科学队伍对外部审查的普遍敏感性,因此在这一“灰色地带”工作对传统的GLP, GCP或GMP审核员产生了很高的风险。我们已经开发、尝试和测试了一种非常有效的、新颖的审计模型,用于评估非监管研究的质量。这个简单的系统可以成功地应用于任何科学学科或领域。虽然在任何质量体系审核过程中,通用原则始终适用,但正如我们所发现的,我们在这里描述的改进和特质将有助于成功。我们的假设是,这是第一次努力的质量专业。版权所有©2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A novel audit model for assessing quality in non‐regulated research
The need for Quality standards in non-regulated research is a matter of considerable current debate. Whilst a number of such guidelines have been developed over recent years, their successful implementation remains a challenge to all. In order to assess whether research standards are indeed improving on the bench following the instigation of such a quality system, a question posed by both senior management and scientists alike, an independent compliance programme is required. However, given the lack of predicate rules, naivety to audit process and general sensitivity to external scrutiny within the scientific ranks, then work in this ‘Grey Area’ generates high exposure for the conventional GLP, GCP or GMP auditor. We have developed, tried, and tested a highly effective, novel audit model for assessing the quality of non-regulated research. This simple system can be applied successfully irrespective of scientific discipline or field. Whilst common principles will always apply during any quality system audit, the refinements and idiosyncrasies we describe here will, as we have found, help underpin success. Our intentional assumption is that this is a first time endeavour for the quality professional. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信