By definition research projects being carried out by undergraduate or Masters students are subject to course-related timelines. To ensure that the ethical implications of these projects can be considered in line with our ethical standards and in a timely fashion, the University has put in place a proportionate review process that is managed and carried out by Departments/Divisions.
Please note, as of September 2023 Undergraduate and Masters applications are processed via the Ethics@Bath online review system. The review routes are explained below.
To access Ethics@Bath, the new ethics review online system, please go to https://ethics.bath.ac.uk/.
Ethics Review Processes for Undergraduate and Masters Projects
For the purpose of reviewing the ethical implications of research being conducted by Undergraduate or Master Students, Departments have chosen either to set up a Departmental level ‘Panel’ or a ‘Pool of reviewers’ to consider the ethical implications of projects that involve human participation, their data or tissue. Both mechanisms will be able to conduct proportionate reviews of these projects and will be able to escalate more complex projects for review by one of the University Research Ethics Committees if needed.
Undergraduate and Masters Students will be automatically routed to the correct type of research ethics review according to their course, Department and type of project being carried out.
Applications will be submitted within the Ethics@Bath system, reviewed within the system, and outcomes will be ultimately shared via the system.
Low potential to do harm review
Applications with 'low potential to do harm' (those that do not involve humans or animals) will be signed off by the main supervisor and auto-approved by the Ethics@Bath system, without the need for further review.
Full review
Applications that involve elements requiring further review (for example, the recruitment of human participants), will require consideration departmentally by either a ‘Panel’ or ‘Pool’ of reviewers, as referenced above and described in further detail below. The system will automatically triage applications depending on the information provided.
Panel vs Pool
The key difference between a Panel and a Pool review is that the Panel will meet to discuss applications whereas the Pool option is limited to reviewing applications by circulation without the requirement to have a meeting. As mentioned above, should a project raise significant ethical concerns, applications can be referred to one of the university’s Research Ethics Committees.
Departmental level Research Ethics Panels are managed by a Departmental-based member of staff (academic or professional services, at the discretion of the Department) who takes on the role of Secretary thus being responsible for ensuring that applications are reviewed and that applicants are informed of the review outcome; that outcomes of the meetings are logged onto the system and for organising the Panel meetings. Together with the Chair they will also ensure that the meeting is quorate and operating in line with its Terms of Reference.
Quality Assurance
For quality assurance purposes, 10% of these applications will be reviewed annually to confirm that the process is operating as intended. More information about how this quality assurance process will be carried out will follow in due course.
Outside of scope of Departmental review
The Panel/Pool will only review applications from Undergraduate or Masters students with potential to do harm i.e., which involve the recruitment of healthy participants, accessing their data or tissue. For instances where the projects involve animal work or require Sponsorship by the University in line with the UK Framework for Research in Health and Social Care Research, these will be automatically triaged by the Ethics@Bath online system so that they can be reviewed by AWERB or the External & Sponsorship Research Ethics Committee, respectively.
All outcomes post Panel/Pool review will be reported quarterly to the Academic Ethics and Integrity Committee.
Departmental Research Ethics Panels Terms of Reference
Purpose
To review the ethics applications forms submitted by Undergraduate or Masters students, via the Ethics@Bath system, under the authority and guidance of the Chair of the Academic Ethics and Integrity Committee, Associate Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research).
Key responsibilities
maintaining ethical standards of practice in research with potential to do harm
protecting human participants from potential harm
protecting researchers from potential harm
the preservation of participants’ dignity, rights, and welfare
taking account of legitimate interests of other individuals, bodies, and communities associated with the research and providing reassurance to the public and to outside bodies that their legitimate interests have been protected
operating free from perceived or actual conflicts of interest so that the application of ethics principles and reasoning is neither impeded nor compromised
Panel Duties
To receive details of research proposed to be carried out, by Undergraduate or Masters students in their respective Department, where the research will involve human participation, their tissue or data and thus might reasonably be considered to have potential to do harm.
To consider such research and provide an opinion on the ethical standing of the research. This means providing a favourable opinion, or a favourable opinion conditional on certain defined conditions or specific requirements being met, or an invitation to revise and resubmit to address queries/concerns expressed by the Panel.
Following a favourable opinion, to exercise powers to require the halting of research if substantive ethical problems are identified as the project progresses until such time as any such concerns have been remedied to the satisfaction of the committee.
To withdraw a favourable opinion when concerns such as those identified above are not remedied to the satisfaction of the Panel.
To consider amendments to research which has previously had a favourable opinion.
Departmental Research Ethics Pool Reviewers
Purpose
To review the ethics applications forms submitted by Undergraduate or Masters students, via the Ethics@Bath system, under the authority and guidance of the Chair of the Academic Ethics and Integrity Committee, Associate Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research).
Key responsibilities
The Pool reviewer is responsible for reviewing research ethics applications:
in line with the ethical standards of practice in research with potential to do harm
with the view to protecting human participants and researchers from potential harm
with due regard for the preservation of participants’ dignity, rights, and welfare
while taking into account of legitimate interests of other individuals, bodies, and communities associated with the research and providing reassurance to the public and to outside bodies that their legitimate interests have been protected; and
operating free from perceived or actual conflicts of interest so that the application of ethics principles and reasoning is neither impeded nor compromised
Pool Reviewer Duties
To receive details of research proposed to be carried out, by Undergraduate or MSc students in their respective Department, where the research will involve human participation, their tissue or data and thus might reasonably be considered to have potential to do harm.
To consider such research and provide an opinion on the ethical standing of the research. This means providing a favourable opinion, or a favourable opinion conditional on certain defined conditions or specific requirements being met, or an invitation to revise and resubmit to address queries/concerns expressed by the Pool Reviewer.
Following a favourable opinion, via AEIC, to exercise powers to require the halting of research if substantive ethical problems are identified as the project progresses until such time as any such concerns have been remedied to the satisfaction of the committee.
To consider amendments to research which has previously had a favourable opinion.