To Örebro University

oru.seÖrebro University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
How do 66 European institutional review boards approve one protocol for an international prospective observational study on traumatic brain injury? Experiences from the CENTER-TBI study
Department of Intensive Care, Erasmus MC - University Medical Centre Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Department of Neurosurgery, University Neurosurgical Center Holland, LUMC, HMC & Haga Teaching Hospital, Leiden, The Hague, The Netherlands.
Department of Neurosurgery, University Neurosurgical Center Holland, LUMC, HMC & Haga Teaching Hospital, Leiden, The Hague, The Netherlands.
ICON plc, South County Business Park Leopardstown, Dublin, Ireland.
Show others and affiliations
2020 (English)In: BMC Medical Ethics, E-ISSN 1472-6939, Vol. 21, no 1, article id 36Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

BACKGROUND: The European Union (EU) aims to optimize patient protection and efficiency of health-care research by harmonizing procedures across Member States. Nonetheless, further improvements are required to increase multicenter research efficiency. We investigated IRB procedures in a large prospective European multicenter study on traumatic brain injury (TBI), aiming to inform and stimulate initiatives to improve efficiency.

METHODS: We reviewed relevant documents regarding IRB submission and IRB approval from European neurotrauma centers participating in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI). Documents included detailed information on IRB procedures and the duration from IRB submission until approval(s). They were translated and analyzed to determine the level of harmonization of IRB procedures within Europe.

RESULTS: From 18 countries, 66 centers provided the requested documents. The primary IRB review was conducted centrally (N = 11, 61%) or locally (N = 7, 39%) and primary IRB approval was obtained after one (N = 8, 44%), two (N = 6, 33%) or three (N = 4, 23%) review rounds with a median duration of respectively 50 and 98 days until primary IRB approval. Additional IRB approval was required in 55% of countries and could increase duration to 535 days. Total duration from submission until required IRB approval was obtained was 114 days (IQR 75-224) and appeared to be shorter after submission to local IRBs compared to central IRBs (50 vs. 138 days, p = 0.0074).

CONCLUSION: We found variation in IRB procedures between and within European countries. There were differences in submission and approval requirements, number of review rounds and total duration. Research collaborations could benefit from the implementation of more uniform legislation and regulation while acknowledging local cultural habits and moral values between countries.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
BioMed Central (BMC), 2020. Vol. 21, no 1, article id 36
Keywords [en]
CENTER-TBI, European Union, Harmonization, Health-care research, Research ethic committees
National Category
Neurology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-81850DOI: 10.1186/s12910-020-00480-8ISI: 000535606600002PubMedID: 32398066Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85084535573OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-81850DiVA, id: diva2:1430199
Available from: 2020-05-14 Created: 2020-05-14 Last updated: 2024-07-04Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Oresic, Matej

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Oresic, Matej
By organisation
School of Medical Sciences
In the same journal
BMC Medical Ethics
Neurology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 136 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf