A CTSA One Health Alliance guidance on institutional review of veterinary clinical studies.

Publisher: BioMed Central Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 101249759 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1746-6148 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 17466148 NLM ISO Abbreviation: BMC Vet Res Subsets: MEDLINE

Original Publication: London : BioMed Central, 2005-

Animal Welfare*; Research/*standards ; Veterinary Medicine/*standards; Animals ; Consent Forms ; Ethics, Research ; One Health ; United States

Harmonized institutional processes and reviewer training are vital to maintain integrity and ethical rigor of the veterinary clinical research pipeline and are a prerequisite to future work that might establish centralized or single-site ethical and regulatory review to ease initiation of multi-center studies. Funded by a CTSA One Health Alliance (COHA) pilot award, a diverse working group of veterinary clinicians and institutional representatives was convened in February 2020 to develop a guidance document detailing broadly agreed upon practices for ethical review and approval of veterinary clinical studies conducted in the United States.The working group defined key areas of need for consensus, developed a set of associated guidelines, and circulated these for review by COHA's fifteen member institutions. Six focus areas were identified by the working group and included vital items of protocol review, composition of the review committee, post-approval monitoring and adverse event reporting, consideration of special circumstances such as satellite sites and the use of healthy veterinary subjects in research, and the informed consent process.This document outlines a broadly agreed-upon framework through which to approach vital items associated with veterinary clinical study protocol review and approval. These approaches represent current best practice in the review and approval of veterinary clinical studies, and can serve as a guidance for veterinary clinician-scientists and regulatory experts, to ensure robust and ethically conducted studies that can contribute to the advancement of both animal and human health.

BMC Med Ethics. 2014 Sep 05;15:66. (PMID: 25189994)
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2008 Sep;3(3):49-56. (PMID: 19385770)
Ethics Hum Res. 2019 Mar;41(2):2-13. (PMID: 30895755)
Sci Transl Med. 2015 Oct 7;7(308):308ps21. (PMID: 26446953)
Arch Intern Med. 2004 Apr 12;164(7):801-3. (PMID: 15078651)
Health Res Policy Syst. 2017 Feb 7;15(1):8. (PMID: 28173859)
Semin Perinatol. 2016 Jun;40(4):247-53. (PMID: 26804381)
Bioethics. 2017 Feb;31(2):128-135. (PMID: 28060430)
Trials. 2019 Nov 9;20(1):624. (PMID: 31706324)
J Vet Intern Med. 2019 Mar;33(2):350-355. (PMID: 30793806)
IRB. 2012 Jan-Feb;34(1):1-8. (PMID: 22338401)
Ann Intern Med. 2013 Feb 5;158(3):200-7. (PMID: 23295957)
BMC Med. 2014 Mar 24;12:52. (PMID: 24655604)
J Small Anim Pract. 2009 Jun;50(6):274-81. (PMID: 19527420)
Nature. 2016 Jan 21;529(7586):263-4. (PMID: 26791697)
N Engl J Med. 2006 Sep 7;355(10):1018-28. (PMID: 16908486)
Cancer Control. 2018 Jan-Mar;25(1):1073274818773720. (PMID: 29716399)
J Vet Intern Med. 2016 Mar-Apr;30(2):527-35. (PMID: 26950524)
J Transl Med. 2018 Dec 4;16(1):336. (PMID: 30509294)
Account Res. 2017;24(7):407-432. (PMID: 28777661)
Lab Anim (NY). 2009 Jun;38(6):185. (PMID: 19557885)
J Med Ethics. 2007 Mar;33(3):165-7. (PMID: 17329389)
J Law Med Ethics. 2000 Winter;28(4):332-43. (PMID: 11317426)
Bioethics. 1997 Oct;11(5):373-89. (PMID: 11655117)
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2006 Jun;1(2):39-58. (PMID: 19385877)
Bioethics. 2017 Feb;31(2):87-96. (PMID: 28060429)
Medicoleg Bioeth. 2015 Jun 24;5:35-41. (PMID: 26807399)
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2018 Oct 15;253(8):980-984. (PMID: 30272514)
BMJ Open. 2014 Feb 04;4(2):e003821. (PMID: 24496696)
J Med Ethics. 2004 Jun;30(3):293-8. (PMID: 15173366)

UL1 TR002733 United States TR NCATS NIH HHS; UL1TR002733 United States TR NCATS NIH HHS

Date Created: 20210218 Date Completed: 20210802 Latest Revision: 20240331

20240331

PMC7890984

10.1186/s12917-021-02790-4

33596904