Research ethics committee approval as reported for abstracts submitted to the annual Euroanaesthesia meeting

BACKGROUND The annual congress of the European Society of Anaesthesiology (ESA) is one of the largest anaesthesia congresses in the world and exhibits more than 1200 abstracts annually. OBJECTIVES The aims of this study were to quantify the frequency of inadequate evidence of ethical approval for abstracts submitted to the ESA congress and to examine whether abstracts without appropriate ethical approval were subsequently accepted. DESIGN AND SETTING All abstracts submitted in 2015 were adjudicated according to European ethical criteria. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE The proportion of submitted abstracts that lacked evidence of appropriate ethics committee approval. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of accepted abstract that lacked evidence of appropriate ethical approval; the proportion of correctly identified case reports; the proportion of accepted abstracts that lacked evidence of appropriate ethics committee approvals corresponding to location (within/outside Europe); and the proportion of accepted abstracts that lacked evidence of appropriate ethics committee approvals corresponding to a specific area of research. RESULTS In total, 1792 abstracts were reviewed and 1572 (87.7%) involved humans. In 527 (29.4%), the authors failed to demonstrate adequate ethical approval with higher rates in abstracts submitted from Europe (32.1%) than the rest of the world (23.5%), P < 0.001. Appropriate approvals were reported in 80% of animal studies, 74.6% of case reports and 57.6% of human research studies. The proportion with evidence of adequate ethical approvals was lowest in obstetric anaesthesia and emergency medicine. Case reports were identified correctly 98.6% (347/352) of the time, but 14 research abstracts were assigned wrongly to this category. Most abstracts (68.5%, 361/527) lacking evidence of ethical approval were still accepted for presentation. CONCLUSION Research abstracts lacking evidence of appropriate ethical approval are common worldwide. Societies shoulder the responsibility for ensuring that only ethically sound abstracts are presented at meetings. Abstract submission systems must include mechanisms to ensure that publications are accepted and judged not just on scientific merit but also on adherence to best ethical practice.

[1]  B. Goldacre,et al.  Problems with ethical approval and how to fix them: lessons from three trials in rheumatoid arthritis , 2016, British Medical Journal.

[2]  Chih-Shung Wong,et al.  Tiny tweaks, big changes: An alternative strategy to empower ethical culture of human research in anesthesia (A Taiwan Acta Anesthesiologica Taiwanica-Ethics Review Task Force Report). , 2015, Acta anaesthesiologica Taiwanica : official journal of the Taiwan Society of Anesthesiologists.

[3]  Qinghui Zhou,et al.  [Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing and publication of scholarly work in medical journals]. , 2014, Zhonghua gan zang bing za zhi = Zhonghua ganzangbing zazhi = Chinese journal of hepatology.

[4]  P. Ravaud,et al.  Lack of head-to-head trials and fair control arms: randomized controlled trials of biologic treatment for rheumatoid arthritis. , 2012, Archives of internal medicine.

[5]  S. Pearson Placebo-controlled trials, ethics, and the goals of comparative effectiveness research: comment on "lack of head-to-head trials and fair control arms". , 2012, Archives of internal medicine.

[6]  B. Ure,et al.  Failure to Report Ethical Approval and Informed Consent in Paediatric Surgical Publications , 2011, European journal of pediatric surgery : official journal of Austrian Association of Pediatric Surgery ... [et al] = Zeitschrift fur Kinderchirurgie.

[7]  C. Romeo-Casabona,et al.  Some ethical aspects of xenotransplantation in light of the proposed European directive on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes. , 2010, Transplantation proceedings.

[8]  World Medical Association (WMA),et al.  Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects , 2009, Journal of the Indian Medical Association.

[9]  K. Finlay,et al.  Failure to report and provide commentary on research ethics board approval and informed consent in medical journals , 2008, Journal of Medical Ethics.

[10]  S. Schroter,et al.  Reporting ethics committee approval and patient consent by study design in five general medical journals , 2006, Journal of Medical Ethics.

[11]  P. Myles,et al.  Reporting of Ethical Approval and Informed Consent in Clinical Research Published in Leading Anesthesia Journals , 2003, Anesthesiology.

[12]  M. C. Atlas Emerging ethical issues in instructions to authors of high-impact biomedical journals. , 2003, Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA.

[13]  A. Flanagin Human rights in the biomedical literature: the social responsibility of medical journals. , 2000, JAMA.

[14]  J. Karlawish,et al.  What is the Quality of the Reporting of Research Ethics in Publications of Nursing Home Research? , 1999, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.

[15]  C. Sprung,et al.  Evaluation of Institutional Review Board review and informed consent in publications of human research in critical care medicine. , 1998, Critical care medicine.

[16]  Martyn Thomas,et al.  What is quality , 1990 .