Dear RadStats people,

You may be aware that research in health and medicine needs approval from a Research Ethics Committee (REC) if it is to proceed. Statisticians are one of the specialisms (along with various medical, e.g. pharmacist, as well as lay people.) sought for such a committee. A few statisticians including myself were invited, along with some non-statisticians, by the Central Office for Research Ethics Committees (COREC) to discuss issues around statistics and RECs.

(I was someone who thought there ought to be more attention given to supporting statistics/ statisticians in the context of RECs as, when I joined my REC, I looked and found nothing).

A couple of the working group members circulated information to 2 groups of statisticians,
1) a rather inaccurate list of RSS members who had expressed interest in medical statistics
and
2) the email group of professors of statistics.

On reflecting on matters, I would additionally like to sound the views of RadStats people. (Some of you might have been included in the other two, I suppose).

It is particularly relevant because in the midst of our deliberations the report Lord Warner about changes to the REC system was published in June.

See:
http://www.dh.gov.uk/assetRoot/04/11/24/17/04112417.pdf

For info you might like to see our working group's original brief.

.......the purpose of the group is to advise COREC on the provision of statistical expertise to RECs.  The issues are likely to include:

·       Should the REC have access to independent statistical advice on protocols?
·       Does the REC need a statistician member or could advice be provided as required by an independent adviser/referee?

·       Could advisers/referees serve more than one committee and operate within a pool?
·       What kind of statistician is needed?
·       What are the resource implications for individuals and departments?
·       Would it be satisfactory for the same statistician to advise the research team and the REC?  How should possible competing interests be addressed?

·       What reliance can be placed on the peer review procedure before the REC application is submitted?
·       Are any changes needed to the questions in the REC application form about peer review and statistics?
·       What additional guidance should be given to applicants and ethics committees about these issues?
·       What training needs do REC members have and how could these be addressed?

Anyway I'd be interest to know your thoughts on statistics and Research Ethics Committees.

Paul Marchant

Priestley Hall
School of Information Management
Leeds Metropolitan University
Beckett Park
Leeds LS6 3QS
Tel 0113 2836109