Rheumatology Advance Access originally published online on March 9, 2005
Rheumatology 2005 44(5):571-572; doi:10.1093/rheumatology/keh579
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oupjournals.org
EDITORIAL |
Meeting the challenges of research governance
Keele University, Primary Care Sciences Research Centre, Stoke, Staffs, United Kingdom
Correspondence to: J. Hill. E-mail: j.hill@keele.ac.uk
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
There is a tangible sense of hostility being expressed among UK clinical researchers at present, directed at NHS Trusts implementation of the Department of Health's (DOH) Research Governance Framework (RGF) [14]. Researchers fear a decline in the UK's impressive research record due to the obstacles resulting from lengthy, complex, bureaucratic implementation procedures presented by research managers in NHS Trusts [5]. In addition, the UK health service has undergone radical organisational change, adding further complexities in the delivery of high quality research. Here we evaluate the impact of RGF particularly to multicentre clinical trials and contribute to the debate by sharing our personal experiences.
There is no doubt that patients must be assured that clinical research is undertaken to the highest standards, and an integral part of such an assurance includes improved standards of accountability. Urgent action has been required to address the crisis of public confidence