ArticleJournal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR2016
A Study of Assessing Errors and Completeness of Research Application Forms Submitted to Instituitional Ethics Committee (IEC) of a Tertiary Care Hospital.
Article in Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionApplication form of research work is an essential requirement which is required to be submitted along with the research proposal to the Ethics Committee (EC).
aimTo check the completeness and to find the errors in application forms submitted to the EC of a tertiary care hospital. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe application forms of research projects submitted to the Institutional Review Board (IRB), Government Medical College, Bhavnagar, Gujarat, India from January 2014 to June 2015 were analysed for completeness and errors, with respect to the following - type of study, information about study investigators, sample size, study participants, title of the studies, signatures of all investigators, regulatory approval, recruitment procedure, compensation to study participants, informed consent process, information about sponsor, declaration of conflict of interest, plans for storage and maintenance of data, patient information sheet, informed consent forms and study related documents.
resultsTotal 100 application forms were analysed. Among them, 98 were academic and 2 were industrial studies. Majority of academic studies were of basic science type. In 63.26% studies, type of study was not mentioned in title. Age group of subjects was not mentioned in 8.16% application forms. In 34.6% informed consent, benefits of the study were not mentioned. Signature of investigators/co-investigators/Head of the Department was missing in 3.06% cases.
conclusionOur study recommends that the efficiency and speed of review will increase if investigator will increase vigilance regarding filling of application forms. Regular meetings will be helpful to solve the problems related to content of application forms. The uniformity in functioning of EC can be achieved if common application form for all ECs is there.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.