College of Medical, Veterinary & Life Sciences

Outline of Procedures

College Ethics Officer

The College has designated an officer responsible for the management of ethical issues in research in the College. The responsibilities of the Ethics Officer are as follows:

• ensuring that any policy or guidelines developed with or through the University Ethics Committee are followed;
• keeping College ethical issues in research under review;
• managing and monitoring the procedures in practice;
• ensuring that appropriate records of applications, practices and decisions are made and kept;
• reporting to the Head of College as appropriate;
• reporting to the College through an appropriate forum;
• reporting on an annual basis on behalf of the College to the University Ethics Committee.
• conducting a three yearly review of College ethical procedures and reporting on behalf of the College to the University Ethics Committee.
• Membership of the University Ethics Committee. This entails attending meetings of the University Ethics Committee and dealing with the work of that Committee.

The contact details for the Ethics Officer are given below.

Prof Jesse Dawson
(Chair of the MVLS College Ethics Committee)
School of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Health
email: Jesse.Dawson@glasgow.ac.uk

 

Administrative queries should be directed to

mvls-ethics-admin@glasgow.ac.uk

 

College Ethics Committee

A College Ethics Committee has been established to advise on ethical issues in research in the College and to assess for approval research proposals involving the issues outlined above.

Constitution and Membership of the College Ethics Committee

The College Ethics Committee shall consist of at least 20 members, including the Chair, two deputies and at least one lay member. Each member is expected to review 12 applications per year and serve on the committee for at least 3 years. The committee should contain representation from every school within MVLS and from MVLS research administration. There should be a minimum of 3 members from School of Health and Wellbeing, the School of Medicine and the School of Cardiovascular Sciences and Metabolic Health. The composition of the committee will be reviewed annually and be updated to reflect the number of applications and the number of applications by school. 

The business of the committee will be conducted electronically with meetings three or four times per year as necessary. The number for the meeting to be quorate shall be six.

Terms of Reference

The College Ethics Committee's terms of reference are:

• to consider non-clinical research proposals (from both the College's staff and its students) involving human participants and data;
• to either give written approval for such proposals in the form of minutes or provide written information as to why approval has not been given;
• to consider revised submissions;
• to refer to the University Ethics Committee cases which cannot be satisfactorily resolved or about which there is uncertainty;
• to operate procedures no less rigorous than those suggested or required by relevant professional bodies.
• to inform the University Ethics Committee of any changes in the ethical codes of professional bodies in relevant discipline areas, in order that the University's procedures remain valid.

Application Procedure

• The procedures for considering these ethical issues are as follows:
• Research proposals involving volunteer participants will be submitted to the College Ethics Committee as described on the webpages.
• Before uploading an application, please download and complete the MVLS Ethics screening form which distinguishes between different types of research and points you to the appropriate application forms to fill in for your application. The completed screening form should be uploaded as a supporting document (labelled SCREENING FORM) to the application itself, as this will help administrators to allocate suitable reviewers.
• Use the appropriate form
• In the case of proposals involving external contract or sponsorship the applicant will be provided with a checklist which includes confirmation that academic freedom and publication rights are not compromised in any agreement. The completed checklist will be filed along with a copy of the application and any contract. The Head of College will establish that the best interests of the University and the College have been met before giving approval to any contract.
• The College Committee will consider the application in accordance with the agreed procedures. They will inform the applicant of the decision and any amendments that need to be made or reasons for not giving approval of the research.
• If the research application has not been approved by College Ethics Committee this decision may be appealed to the University Ethics Committee.
• The University Ethics Committee hearing the application either as the initial review body or on appeal will follow the procedures set out in the document: Constitution and Operation of the University Ethics Committee.

Application Requirements

• Use the appropriate form
• Each application should use the appropriate application form (as specified in the screening form), and accompanied with at least two additional supporting documents (with the exception of applications concerning secondary data analyses, where no new participants will be recruited):
• An information sheet, i.e. a ‘plain English’ description of the study and its procedures, enabling participants to decide whether they wish to take part or not.
• A consent form, i.e. a written statement to be signed (or click-confirmed if it’s an online study) by the participant whereby they agree to take part in the study (please note that the signed consent form is an important document that should be kept for the records once the study is completed).
• For projects involving EEG, fMRI, MEG, or TMS, please see the following webpages for guidelines and templates (Note: these templates may also serve as useful guidance for applications in other research areas):
• CCNi Projects: Submit an Ethics Application
• CCNi Projects: Review by the steering group
• If you intend to conduct a study with UNDERAGED (under 16 years of age) participants, the application MUST be accompanied with an Ethics Children Research Plan Form, ensuring that all the necessary permissions described in that form are obtained.
• If you are conducting on-line research via the internet, you should consider appropriate guidelines (such as BPS Guidelines).

Review process

Each application will normally be reviewed online by two Committee members.  For low-risk applications, such as those involving questionnaires/surveys/focus groups, only Committee member will review the application.  However, if the questionnaires/surveys/focus groups involve the participation of children or protected vulnerable adults, they may be reviewed by two Committee members.  On receipt of the ethical review, the Chair or Deputy Chair will add their own comments and either feed back the joint decision to the applicant or, if differing views regarding the ethical content have been expressed by the reviewers, will circulate the application more widely within the Committee.  Discussion (usually electronically) of each application will ideally lead to consensus, and this decision will then be communicated to the applicant.  If necessary, an application will be held over to the next Committee meeting for discussion or an ad hoc Committee meeting will be called to discuss it.

Minor discrepancies in opinion within the Committee may be resolved by vote if necessary, with a casting vote allocated to the Chair. If significant discussion arises without satisfactory resolution, this will provoke referral of the application to the University Ethics Committee. Substantial concerns on the committee about the competence of the Committee to make a decision based on available information may also provoke a referral to the UEC.

The committee decision will be one of:

• Approve with Minor Changes Required (this decision means that the application will only be returned to the lead reviewer for further comment once it is resubmitted by the applicant).
• Approve with Major Changes Required (this decision means that the application will be returned to both the reviewers and the lead reviewer for further comment once it is resubmitted by the applicant).
• Approve (the application is approved and can no longer be amended).
• Reject Application (the creator and the supervisor (where applicable) are informed of the rejection and the applicant must submit a completely new application if they wish to re-submit).