The National Statement requires that all research proposals involving human participants be reviewed and approved by an HREC. The National Statement sets out the requirements for the composition of an HREC, stipulating that an HREC should consist of no less than eight members with specific qualifications and expertise.
In undertaking this role, the HREC is guided by relevant standards. Standards include those articulated in the National Statement. Each member is responsible for deciding whether a proposal meets the relevant standards and requirements to ensure it is ethically acceptable. Committee members are not advocates.
The Presiding Officer of the Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) is responsible for the leadership and supervision of the HREC, to ensure on behalf of the University, all research activities involving human participants are ethically acceptable and in accordance with relevant standards and guidelines. as appointed by the DVC-RDI.
|Deputy Presiding Officer|
Suitable experience, as appointed by the DVC-RDI. This role supports the Presiding Officer, acting in their absence.
1 x Layman &
The role of a lay person is to read applications to reflect community understanding and expectations. They have no current affiliation with CSU and do not currently engage in medical, scientific, legal or academic work.
Professional care, counselling or treatment of people, for example a nurse or allied health professional.
Review the consent process and project protocol to see if the project is justified and does not unreasonably burden or distress on participants. This category also evaluates if the risks are acceptable in comparison to the benefits.
Pastoral care role in the community for example an Aboriginal elder or minister of religion.
The role of this category is to consider the participant's welfare and rights, and that the study is culturally sensitive and does not discriminate or infringe on key beliefs between cultures or religious groups.
Lawyer where possible who is not engaged to advise the institution.
Identify institutional and participant risks.
At least one nominee from each Faculty with current research experience appointed by the DVC-RDI in consultation with Executive Dean of each Faculty.
Review the application for discipline specific content.
One academic staff member with current research experience from the disciplines of Philosophy, Exercise Science and Psychology.
These are not required by the National Statement, however where possible are included in membership to review discipline specific content.
There should be an alternate member for each of the categories required by the National Statement.
Following the National Statement CSU has elected to review applications at one of two levels. Any research deemed to carry more than low risk is reviewed by a fully constituted HREC. Research that carries no more than low risk is reviewed by one of the three Faculty Ethics Committees.
Appointed by Executive Dean to oversee processes for the leadership and supervision of the FHEC, to ensure on behalf of the University, all research activities involving human participants are ethically acceptable and in accordance with relevant standards and guidelines.
Associate Dean Research or Associated Sub-Dean Research
To provide strategic research input.
At least one representative from each School in the Faculty
To review the application for discipline specific content.