Differences in clinical trial conduct in US and EU investigational sites
暂无分享,去创建一个
Observations by clinical auditors about good clinical practice (GCP) compliance in US and EU investigational sites are described. Specific differences between the two regions are noted for institutional review boards (IRBs) and ethics committees; subject recruiting and consenting; investigator/study coordinator qualifications and functions; organization and recording of source data; health care delivery; quality of monitoring; and filing of regulatory documents. Neither region of the world demonstrated GCP superiority in the conduct of its clinical trials. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
[1] G. Ball,et al. GCP COMPLIANCE ASSESSED BY INDEPENDENT AUDITING: INTERNATIONAL SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES , 2000 .
[2] G. Ball,et al. A QUALITATIVE VIEW OF INTERNATIONAL COMPLIANCE , 1998 .
[3] G. Nahler,et al. GCP DEFICIENCIES IN CLINICAL TRIALS IN WESTERN AND EASTERN EUROPE : RESULTS OF INTERNATIONAL CLINICAL TRIAL CENTER AUDITS , 1998 .