Skip to main content

Table 3 Questionnaire’s answers.

From: Professional and academic profile of the Brazilian research ethics committees

Question

Answer

N

%

Who defines the members

Institution

32

38.1

Members

16

19

Institution + Member + Coordinator

12

14.3

Criteria for defining the members

Time availability

16

19

Research experience

13

15.5

Time availability and research experience

25

29.8

Knowledge on the REC/CONEP system

2

2.4

Research experience and bioethics

2

2.4

Hard to get

Community representative

41

48.8

Social Sciences and Humanities

13

15.5

Community and Social Sciences and Humanities

12

14.3

Difficulties to participate in the REC

Lack of time

29

34.5

Lack of time and institutional incentive

12

14.3

Lack of time and interest

8

9.5

No score on curriculum (associated values)

21

28.8

Adapting the REC’s composition to the standards

Easy. The rules are compatible with the institutional and professional reality of the REC

28

33.3

Difficulty to find member for some categories

22

26.2

Difficulty due to lack of interest or possibility to participate in the REC

15

17.9

Meeting the deadlines of CNS OS 001/13

Easy. Deadlines compatible with the REC’s composition and profile

49

58.3

Difficulty to meet deadlines in the analysis of specific areas

14

16.7

Difficult. The deadlines are not compatible with the number of REC members

8

9.5

Composition suitable for accreditation

Yes

34

40.5

No

13

15.5

The REC is not interested in the accreditation

15

17.9

The REC is adapting itself for the accreditation process

14

16.7

Suiting the composition to CNS Res 506/16

Easy. The rules are compatible with the institutional and professional reality of the REC

28

33.3

Difficult. The rules are not compatible with the institutional and professional reality of the REC

22

26.2

Difficulty due to the professionals’ lack of interest or possibility of participating in the REC

13

15.5

Operational and financial difficulty

3

3.6

Suitable for reviewing SSH research

Yes

64

76.2

No

8

9.5

The REC is still adapting itself to review projects in this field

7

8.3

Suiting the REC’s composition to the CNS Res 510/16

Easy. The rules are compatible with the institutional and professional reality of the members

50

59.5

Operational difficulty. The rules are not compatible with the institutional and professional reality of the members

13

15.5

Difficulty due to the professionals’ lack of interest or possibility of participating in the REC

11

13.1