Is research declining among gastroenterology trainees in the UK

Editor – Clark et al comment on the problems of trainees carrying out research (Clin Med June 2013 pp 323). As chair of a research ethics committee (REC), I wonder if the authors really needed REC approval for their project.

Using the National Research Ethics Service (NRES) Defining Research leaflet,¹ it would appear that their study might well come under the heading of ‘service evaluation’. It seems ‘designed and conducted solely to define or judge current care’. It clearly complies with ‘usually involves analysis of existing data but may include administration of interview or questionnaire’.

It is a general point that many of the projects submitted by trainees for REC approval could be classified either under this heading, or as ‘clinical audit’ – which also does not usually need REC review. If in doubt, the chair of a REC will usually be able to give advice – we’re just as happy as the researcher to keep paperwork to a minimum.

This is my personal opinion – I do not speak for NRES!

• © 2013 Royal College of Physicians