A case study evaluation of ethics review systems for multicentre clinical trials

Tania Shelby-James, Meera R Agar and David C Currow
Med J Aust 2010; 192 (5): . || doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2010.tb03514.x
Published online: 1 March 2010

To the Editor: The evaluation by Hicks and colleagues of the centralised ethics review system in New South Wales1 codifies important additional time delays facing researchers conducting multicentre trials that include NSW. These delays have direct financial consequences that continue to limit the viability (especially when staff are on time-limited grants) and productivity of multisite research in Australia, without adding value to the ethical conduct of the research.2 There is also inconsistency between the approaches of the lead ethics committee (LEC) and site-specific ethics committees in the way they deal with protocol amendments and adverse event governance, further compounding the delays in initial review.

  • Tania Shelby-James1
  • Meera R Agar2
  • David C Currow1

  • 1 Department of Palliative and Supportive Services, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA.
  • 2 Braeside Hospital, Sydney, NSW.



remove_circle_outline Delete Author
add_circle_outline Add Author

Do you have any competing interests to declare? *

I/we agree to assign copyright to the Medical Journal of Australia and agree to the Conditions of publication *
I/we agree to the Terms of use of the Medical Journal of Australia *
Email me when people comment on this article

Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.