Research published in
BMC Medical Ethics has found that NHS research ethics committees (RECs) could monitor bias in clinical trial publication and outcome reporting. RECs review all applications for NHS research conducted in the UK and determine whether the research is ethical. There are currently more than 60 RECs across the UK that each year review around 6,000 research applications.
Researchers working at the ‘Hampshire A’ research ethics committee reviewed 116 studies completed between January 2010 and December 2011. They reviewed study application forms to compare
original primary and secondary outcomes (what the study was set up and designed to investigate) with the outcomes that were
actually published in academic journals.
The research found that only 37/116 studies were published in an academic journal (32%), and over half (57%) of published studies had primary or secondary outcomes which differed from those in the original trial application form.
All UK NHS research must go through ethical approval, which means that RECs have unique access to the data on which studies are conducted and what the studies are designed to explore. The results demonstrate that it would be possible for RECs to monitor publication and outcome reporting bias for UK research.
