首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>BMJ Global Health >It is time to revise the international Good Clinical Practices guidelines: recommendations from non-commercial North–South collaborative trials
【2h】

It is time to revise the international Good Clinical Practices guidelines: recommendations from non-commercial North–South collaborative trials

机译:现在该修订国际良好临床规范指南:非商业性南北合作试验的建议

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

The Good Clinical Practices (GCP) codes of the WHO and the International Conference of Harmonization set international standards for clinical research. But critics argue that they were written without consideration for the challenges faced in low and middle income countries (LMICs). Based on our field experience in LMICs, we developed a non-exhaustive set of recommendations for the improvement of GCP. These cover 3 domains: ethical, legal and operational, and 8 specific issues: the double ethical review of ‘externally sponsored’ trials; the informed consent procedure in minors and in illiterate people; post-trial access to newly-developed products for the trial communities; the role of communities as key research actors; the definition of sponsor; and the guidance for contractual agreements, laboratory quality management systems, and quality assurance of investigational medicinal products. Issues not covered in our analysis include among others biobanking, standard of care, and study designs. The international GCP codes de facto guide national legislators and funding agencies, so the current shortcomings may weaken the regulatory oversight of international research. In addition, activities neglected by GCP are less likely to be implemented or funded. If GCP are meant to serve the interests of global society, a comprehensive revision is needed. The revised guidelines should be strongly rooted in ethics, sensitive to different sociocultural perspectives, and allow consideration for trial-specific and context-specific challenges. This can be only achieved if all stakeholders, including researchers, sponsors, regulators, ethical reviewers and patients' representatives from LMICs, as well as non-commercial researchers and sponsors from affluent countries, are transparently involved in the revision process. We hope that our limited analysis would foster advocacy for a broad and inclusive revision of the international GCP codes, to make them at the same time ‘global’, ‘context centred’ and ‘patient centred’.
机译:世卫组织和国际协调会议的《良好临床规范》(GCP)准则为临床研究设定了国际标准。但是批评家认为,撰写本文时并未考虑到中低收入国家(LMIC)面临的挑战。根据我们在LMIC中的现场经验,我们针对GCP的改进提出了一系列非详尽的建议。这些内容涵盖3个领域:道德,法律和运营,以及8个具体问题:对“外部赞助”试验的双重道德审查;未成年人和文盲的知情同意程序;在试用后向试用社区提供新开发的产品;社区作为主要研究参与者的角色;保荐人的定义;以及合同协议,实验室质量管理体系和研究用药品的质量保证指南。我们的分析未涵盖的问题包括生物银行,护理标准和研究设计等。国际GCP法规实际上是指导国家立法者和资助机构的指南,因此当前的缺陷可能会削弱对国际研究的监管。此外,被GCP忽略的活动不太可能被实施或资助。如果GCP旨在为全球社会服务,则需要进行全面修订。修订后的准则应根植于道德规范,对不同的社会文化观点敏感,并应考虑到针对特定试验和特定环境的挑战。只有所有利益相关者,包括来自中低收入国家的研究人员,资助者,监管者,伦理审查者和患者代表,以及富裕国家的非商业研究者和资助者都透明地参与修订过程,才能实现这一目标。我们希望我们的有限分析将有助于倡导对国际GCP准则进行广泛而包容的修订,以使其同时成为“全球”,“以情境为中心”和“以患者为中心”。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号