Research Governance review panel

The review panel will carry out the functions of both the Peer Review and Ethics Committees.

Its duty will be to review project plans. It will ensure that all ethical and scientific considerations have been thoroughly considered, so as to ensure the respect, dignity, rights, safety and well-being of participants, in accordance with the Department of Health Research Governance Framework 2001.

Any project plan submitted for appraisal to the Research and Information Services Team of Salford Community, Health and Social Care directorate will need approval if any of the following criteria apply:

• in-depth interviews.
• involvement of children under 18 years old.
• involvement of anyone who is unable to give informed and written consent.
• involvement of anyone in minority categories e.g. asylum seekers.
• the study requires covert observation.
• the study requires the use of identifiable data, which has already been collected.
• the study involves members of staff.

The following checklist for the process of approving project plans is based on the commonly agreed standards of good practice, as laid down in the Declaration of Helsinki. It is also based upon the statement of ethical practice produced by the British Sociological Association and the Department of Health.

The checklist covers the considerations by which the project plan has been formulated:

1. Is the design of the project plan appropriate?
2. Will it involve only minimal and predictable risk to the researcher?
3. Will it involve only minimal and predictable risk to the participant?
4. Are the arrangements for the supervision of the project appropriate?
5. Are the researcher(s) and supervisor competent?
6. Will the benefits of the research outweigh any risks?
7. Will the participants be fully and clearly informed, as to the purpose of the study?
8. Will the participants be clear about the expectations of the researcher?
9. Are the ways in which informed and written consent will be obtained adequate?
10. Will participants be clear about their right to withdraw, or refusal to participate?
11. Has participants vulnerability, due to their social, psychological or medical circumstances been taken into account in obtaining consent?
12. Where participants are unable to provide informed and written consent for themselves, has the consent been given by a responsible legal representative?
13. Are the methods of ensuring the anonymity and confidentiality of participants adequate?
14. Are the methods of ensuring the confidentiality of data, adequate?
15. Have you thought about who will have access to any stored data?

This page was last updated on 29 March 2011