Research Review Committee

Purpose

• Function as a sub-committee of the Clinical Board advising the CEO on research and contracts, particularly in areas of innovation, quality and risk.
• Act as a scientific advisory committee and review and approve all research that involves Auckland DHB.
• Provide peer oversight and expert advice to enable the organisation to achieve Auckland DHB goals of supporting and promoting high quality research.
• Advise on ways of encouraging more research activity in the organisation.
• Identify areas of potential growth in high quality research and to promote mechanisms to stimulate appropriate research programmes in such areas.
• Oversee and promote the development and implementation of the Auckland DHB research strategy.
• Provide a conduit for the accountability of researchers via the Clinical Board, CEO and the Board.
• Establish a sub-committee (if necessary) to review research applications.

Note full terms of reference for the Research Review Committee [PDF, 35 KB] are available.

Reviewing and approving research at the Auckland DHB

Research will need to at a minimum, demonstrate the following characteristics:

• Evidence of scientific rigor and sound/innovative practice (includes evidence of previous scientific assessment, i.e. AMRF, HRC, Collaborative Groups).
•  Internal applications must be consistent with Auckland DHB policy, goals and objectives
• Comply with any current regulations, standards, guidelines, statutes and all ethics approval processes.
• Comply with Auckland DHB management approval processes. Choose either link for the process that suits your application: Auckland DHB standard research approval pathway for moderate to high risk observational studies, all interventional studies and studies with budgets; OR Auckland DHB expedited research approval pathway for Low Risk Studies.
• Have an appropriate budget and costing for undertaking the research, including indirect costs.

All research is reviewed by the Research Review Committee using the appropriate application form and accompanied by a full budget and other supportive documentation as described above.

The RRC meet monthly and the committee’s decision and feedback will be forwarded to the investigator usually within two working days after each meeting. If small changes are required, the researcher can make these changes and submit them to the Research Office who will respond within two working days.

Membership

Kim Brackley, Tin Chiu, Michael Collins, Sanjeev Deva, Kevin Ellyett, Iris Fontanilla, Andrew Knox, Helen Lindsay, Colin McArthur (Chair), Stephen Ritchie, Michael Shepherd, Ken Whyte, Michelle Wilson.

Research Review Committee 2021 agenda deadlines and meeting dates

The Research Office requests that all documentation required for the RRC is received at the office by 5pm on the Monday two weeks before the meeting.