Actors involved in the regulation of clinical research: comparison of Finland to England, Canada, and the USA

Table 3 Research ethics committees (RECs) in clinical research regulation ^a in Finland, compared to England, Canada (Ontario), and USA, around 2010

	Finland	England	Canada	USA
Importance	+++	++	+++	+++
Main basis	Research law; EU	Health ministry + NHS regulation; EU	Requirement from research funder CIHR	Research law; health ministry regulation
Area responsibility	Yes	No, inclusive	No, selective	No
Number	Few, law defined	Declining, NRES defined	Many, free	Many, free
Private RECs	No	Few	Yes	Yes, important
All clinical research in the main system	Yes	Not research outside NHS	Not research outside health care units	Yes
Appointing body	Hospital district	NRES	Hospital board ^b	Hospital ^b/private
Funding	Fees + hospital district	NHS	Fees + hospital ^b/grants	Hospital ^b/fees (private)
REC control body	No	Yes, strong NRES	No	Yes, OHRP + FDA

0/+ provides a subjective estimate of the importance of the issue, on relative terms within the four countries; 0, no or little activity. CIHR, Canadian Institutes of Health Research; EU, EU Clinical trials directive; FDA, Food and Drug Administration; NRES, National Research Ethics Service; NHS, National Health Service; OHRP, Office of Human Research Protection.
^a Within the main health care system; two systems in the USA.
^b Hospital or other health care unit.

ISSN: 1478-4505