MRC Experimental Medicine Tool Kit Risk Assessment Tool
Hazards to participants
For the participants’ safety
Hazards of the intervention
Known or predicted adverse effects
Unexpected adverse effects
Failure to provide adequate clinical management of adverse effects
Failure to provide adequate clinical management of patients’ underlying medical condition
Failure to act appropriately upon health information discovered as a consequence of participating in the study
Consider:
Nature of the intervention
Previous experience of intervention
If chemical/drug/biological agent/medical device; Licensing status, indications, clinical experience, pharmacology, toxicology, quality control of manufacture, quality, purity, handling requirements and storage
Staff training and experience
Susceptibility of the population – disease, genetic, age, sex
Blinding
Clinical facilities available in the event of serious adverse event
Clinical input – level and extent required
Likely risk/benefit ratio of the intervention(s) in the study population
Consider:
Non-therapeutic interventions and interventions not offering direct benefit to participants
Minimal risk of harm
Alternative study design
Importance of study objective(s) (Declaration of Helsinki)
Systems to monitor and review adverse effects
Systems to maintain awareness of and to act on new knowledge
Hazards of assessment methods
X-ray, biopsy, questionnaires etc
Consider:
Non-therapeutic studies or studies not offering direct benefit to participants
Handling adverse health information from healthy volunteers
Emotional issues
For the participants’ rights
Entry to a study without fully informed consent
Consider:
Legal requirements
Vulnerability of the study group
Identifying and approaching potential participants
Consent process
Participant information
Training of those providing participant information and obtaining consent
Payments and coercion
Failure to act on patient’s request to withdraw from the study
Consider:
Communication and recording systems
Required safety procedures / follow-up post withdrawal
Failure to protect the privacy of participants
Consider:
Data protection and security systems
Anonymisation
Potential interaction with GP / NHS
Hazards to the study
To the completion of the study – recruitment and follow-up
Consider:
Feasibility, study population, numbers of subjects required
Staff competence and experience
Follow-up requirements
Onerous protocols
To the validity of the results
Study power and/or design
Consider:
Plausible / measurable effects
Number of participants required
Participants randomised or matched
Need for professional statistical input
Alternative approaches
Major violation of eligibility criteria
Consider:
Importance to participant safety
Importance to the study
Need for checking and possible procedures
Unduly restrictive/prescriptive eligibility criteria
Fraud
Consider:
Potential
Incentives – financial and non-financial
Consequences – size and severity of threat to study results
Options for checking
Randomisation procedure
Consider:
Robustness of procedure
Potential for loss of allocation concealment / unblinding
Outcome measure(s)
Consider:
Blinding (single, double)
Validity of measure
Reproducibility of measures
Objectivity of measure
Standardisation of assessment
Potential for independent review
Potential for simple external verification e.g. death certificate, laboratory investigation result
Other data – completeness and accuracy
Consider:
Data type and complexity
Study documentation
Data collection method (paper, electronic)
Data entry method
Key data items
Staff training
Need for and options for verification
Adherence to the protocol
Consider:
Complexity
Staff training and research experience
Barriers to compliance with intervention (for trial personnel and participants)
Hazards to researcher(s)
Personal threat
Consider:
Nature of study group
Environment research to take place in
Training and experience of researcher(s)
Compliance with the law
Consider:
Data protection
Clinical trials
Human tissue
Device trials
Genetic modification
Health and Safety
Indemnity
Consider:
Employer’s policy and exemptions
Approvals needed
Need for non-negligent cover
Hazards to the environment / community
Consider:
Nature of agent used in intervention
Relevant Regulatory framework(s)
Level of containment
Compliance
Facilities
Withdrawal of participants
Study closure
Management strategy / MonitoringHazards to Participants
Safety
Rights
Hazards to study
Hazards to researchers
Hazards to environment/community
1