Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34565355›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2021

A situation analysis of competences of research ethics committee members regarding review of research protocols with complex and emerging study designs in Uganda.

Provia Ainembabazi, Barbara Castelnuovo, Stephen Okoboi, Walter Joseph Arinaitwe, Rosalind Parkes-Ratanshi, Pauline Byakika-Kibwika

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Building Capacity for Research Ethics Committees in Uganda.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Provia AinembabaziInfectious Diseases Institute, Makerere University, College of Health Sciences, P.O BOX 22418, Kampala, Uganda.
Barbara CastelnuovoInfectious Diseases Institute, Makerere University, College of Health Sciences, P.O BOX 22418, Kampala, Uganda.
Stephen OkoboiInfectious Diseases Institute, Makerere University, College of Health Sciences, P.O BOX 22418, Kampala, Uganda.
Walter Joseph ArinaitweInfectious Diseases Institute, Makerere University, College of Health Sciences, P.O BOX 22418, Kampala, Uganda.
Rosalind Parkes-RatanshiInfectious Diseases Institute, Makerere University, College of Health Sciences, P.O BOX 22418, Kampala, Uganda.
Pauline Byakika-KibwikaInfectious Diseases Institute, Makerere University, College of Health Sciences, P.O BOX 22418, Kampala, Uganda. pbyakika@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-0757-1968
Infectious Diseases Institute · UGUniversity of Cambridge · GB

Funding

Towards eliminating HIV in Uganda by 2030; Preparing Ethical Review Committees to support this agendaG11TW011309 · FIC · INFECTIOUS DISEASES INSTITUTE · PI BYAKIKA-KIBWIKA, PAULINE · 2019 to 2021
$373k
FIC NIH HHS G11 TW011309National Institute of Health 1 G11 TW011309-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOver the past two decades, Uganda has experienced a significant increase in clinical research driven by both academia and industry. This has been combined with a broader spectrum of research proposals, with respect to methodologies and types of intervention that need evaluation by Research Ethics Committees (RECs) with associated increased requirement for expertise. We assessed the competencies of REC members regarding review of research protocols with complex and emerging research study designs. The aim was to guide development of a training curriculum to improve the quality of scientific and ethical review.

methodsThis was a cross-sectional study design, with quantitative data collection methods. Research Ethics Committee members completed a structured pre-coded questionnaire on current competence with complex and emerging study design. REC members were asked to outline a list of additional topics for which they needed training. Data from coded questions were entered into Epidata Version 3.1 and then exported to STATA Version14.1 for analysis. Descriptive analysis was performed and findings are presented using percentages and frequencies.

resultsWe enrolled 55 REC members from 6 RECs who have a total of 97 members. The majority of whom were males (56.4%, n = 31/55). The level of competence for review of selected study design was lowest for Controlled Human Infection Model (10.9%, n = 6) and reverse pharmacology design (10.9%, n = 6), and highest for cluster randomized study design (52.7%, n = 29) and implementation science research (52.7%, n = 29).

conclusionCompetence for review of research protocols with complex and emerging study design was low among participating REC members. We recommend prioritising training of REC members on complex and emerging study designs to enhance quality of research protocol review.

Indexed as

Ethics Committees, ResearchResearch DesignCross-Sectional StudiesEthical ReviewHumansMaleUgandaCompetenceComplex and emerging study designsResearch Ethics Committees

Identifiers

PMID34565355
PMCPMC8474911
OpenAlexW3203705616

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.