Dear Angela and Cayuse colleagues, from the discussion thread I conclude that you probably have a different built and approach to your ethics management than we do. As a University in the UK, we have joined the Cayuse community as the result of our developers integrating with Cayuse. I was interested in reading the exchange on this, so thought I would add some info on ours.
We use the ethics and governance workflow as a management tool for ethics applications, as a repository for projects which have undergone ethics approval, as a tracking system for projects which have applied for approval and as a reporting facility. Our workflow uses a combination of system fields (mandatory), plus uploads requirements.
We designed our ethics application workflow (applicable to staff and PG students) in relation to our Ethics and Governance Policy. The principle we applied is that we collect as little information in the form fields as possible with a firm focus on the ethics aspects of the project, amplified by requiring uploads of other existing documentation as appropriate; while providing decision makers with as comprehensive information as needed to assess the ethics application. It works well and is liked by those applying (PG students and staff).
Initially the registration of a project is triaged to identify whether ethics is required. There are then various questions (routing) that will identify the project specific requirements for ethics permission, with advice on what to submit additionally. This is overseen by the 'back office' of the system. On submission, the requisite information (application form and uploaded supporting material) lands with the appropriate disciplinary ethics chair and the application either goes to committee or is processed through chair's action. Outcome and recommendations are recorded in the system and applicant is notified. Projects in some subject areas require an external governance and ethics application (example: health care research) – the policy makes provision for devolving approval (in order to avoid duplication and inconsistencies in outcome). With some basic information on the project, only the outcome and permissions received have to be uploaded. Predesigned uploads include
- A Research Health & Safety Risk Assessment Form (required for all applications)
- Copies of any research materials/tools e.g. questionnaires, interview schedules or other materials to be used in the collection of data
- Participant information materials
- Participant consent form
- An Independent/Peer Review Form
- Any advertisements used to attract participants
Other forms may need to be resourced from other places (system does not aim to be comprehensive).
I am not quite sure whether this is particularly useful to your inquiry – of course happy to share details of the system questions.
------------------------------
Annette King
Director of Research Development
Canterbury Christ Church University
United Kingdom
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 09-22-2021 06:01
From: Angela Bain
Subject: Lets talk checklists
How do you have your checklists formatted? I have been re-working our checklists and they are getting kinda messy as I try to add to them. The submission forms have the ability to break things up into sections but I am not seeing that functionality in the checklists. How do you guys separate different types of checklists and organize the structure?
------------------------------
Angela Bain, CIP, CIM
Director, IRB Office
Kennesaw State University
------------------------------