The University of Southern Queensland reviews all human research ethics applications in accordance with the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research.
All ethics submissions, including new applications, amendments, exemptions, prior approvals, adverse event and milestone reports are to be made through RISE - Ethics Monitor. Please see the relevant tabs below for further information on how to submit.
To start a new Human Research Ethics application for ethics review and approval, please head to Ethics Monitor within RISE.
For resources on how to complete an ethics application, refer to the Application resources and guidance page. For technical support and information on how to navigate Ethics Monitor, please refer to the RISE Human Ethics training guide, or visit the Ethics Monitor SharePoint site.
| Important:
|
|
The following supporting documents must be uploaded to your HRE application:
Depending on what human research activities are involved in your project, the following relevant documents should also be uploaded:
If your project involves any of the following, contact the Ethics Office before completing a HRE application:
If you are involved in a human research project that has been granted ethics approval by another Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) you must request to have that project and the ethics approval acknowledged by the Human UniSQ HREC. To do this, you must submit a Prior Approval application via RISE - Ethics Monitor. This begins the same way as if submitting an ethics application for approval, by following steps 1 - 3 under 'How to submit a new application', then following the steps below:
| How to submit a Prior Approval application. |
|
1. Once you have created a new application (as per new application steps), on the 'Overview' page, select ‘Yes’ in response to the question: 'Do you have a current approval from another Ethics Committee to conduct this project? After selecting ‘Save and Continue’, the application will automatically convert to a Prior Approval application. 2. Before submitting a Prior Approval application, you must complete the Prior Approval Self-checklist. This checklist should then be uploaded to the peer review upload field instead of the mandatory peer review checklist. Note: this upload field is a mandatory field and you will not be able to submit your Prior Approval application without the Prior approval self-checklist. 3. The self-checklist is intended to assist applicants in confirming that all sections of the application have been appropriately completed and that all required supporting documentation has been provided prior to submission to the Ethics Office. For prior approval applications only, the prior approval self-checklist satisfies the Mandatory Peer Review requirement. 5. Once the ethics reviewers are satisfied with your submission, you will receive an outcome of ‘Noted’, indicating that the UniSQ HREC has acknowledged the project and recorded its approval status. |
The following supporting documents must be attached to your Prior Approval application:
Note: if a project is no longer monitored by the approving HREC, for example, when a student transfers from another university, the existing ethics approval may no longer be valid, even if it has not yet expired. In such cases, we are unable to acknowledge ethics approval, and a new ethics application may be required. Please contact the ethics office to discuss your specific circumstances and determine the appropriate next steps.
If you need to make changes or request an extension to your approved HRE application, the changes must be reviewed and approved by the UniSQ Human Research Ethics Committee before implementation.
Please submit your amendment request via RISE – Ethics Monitor. However, do not use the 'Create New Application' option for amendments. Instead, follow the detailed steps outlined below to ensure your request is processed correctly.
Please note: If your Ethics application was originally approved in RIMS, it has been migrated over to RISE - Ethics Monitor. These means you must now use Ethics Monitor to create and submit your amendment application. RIMS approved applications are referred to as 'Legacy applications' and there are slightly different steps involved when submitting an amendment to a legacy application. These steps are detailed further below.
|
How to submit an amendment (RISE approved application): |
|
|
How to submit an amendment (Legacy application): |
|
You can refer to the Human Ethics training guide for further information on how to navigate RISE - Ethics monitor, or visit the RISE Guidance: Ethics Monitor SharePoint site.
It is a standard condition of Human Research Ethics approval that a milestone report is submitted annually and upon completion of the project. When you are due to report, you should receive a notification directing you to go in to the system, and complete this requirement. Unlike new HRE applications and amendment requests, anyone listed as an investigator can create and submit a milestone report.
Please use RISE - Ethics Monitor to submit your milestone. However, do not use the 'Create New Application' option for milestone reports. Instead, follow the detailed steps outlined below to ensure your request is processed correctly.
Please note: If your Ethics application was approved in RIMS, it has been migrated over to RISE - Ethics Monitor - You must use Ethics Monitor to create and submit your milestone report.
|
How to submit a milestone report |
|
| Alternate method |
|
Refer to the Human Ethics training guide for further information on how to navigate RISE - Ethics monitor, or visit the RISE Guidance: Ethics Monitor SharePoint site.
At UniSQ, all new Human Research Ethics applications must undergo peer review using the Human Ethics Peer Review Checklist prior to submission. This process is designed to:
The purpose of the mandatory peer review process is to assess the ethics application submission itself, including the merit of the project as presented solely within the application. Please note the following:
Applicants are responsible for:
Peer reviewers are required to:
If the outcome of the peer review identifies that the application is not ready for ethics review, the applicant must:
Once the peer reviewer confirms that the application is ready for ethics review, the applicant must upload the completed checklist to the ‘Aims and Significance’ page of the ethics application, along with any additional reviewer feedback that may have been provided outside the checklist, before submitting the application for local authoriser consideration.
Should the peer reviewer still find the project lacking sufficient detail for ethics review following a second review, they are advised to refer the application to the relevant Head of School, Centre or Department. A decision will then be made on whether further changes to the project are required or if a new peer reviewer should be sought.
Once submitted, the ethics application is automatically forwarded to the local authoriser associated with the ‘host department’ selected in the application by the applicant. The individual assigned as local authoriser will generally be the Head of School, Associate Head of Research or Centre/Department lead. The local authoriser will either:
Please note: An application is not officially submitted to the ethics office until it has been endorsed by the local authoriser. It is the applicant’s responsibility to allow sufficient time for this endorsement process and to monitor the status of their application during this process. Please refer to the ethics review process and timelines page for more information about these processes.
All researchers and peer reviewers are encouraged to consult the University’s Statement on Peer Review for further information.
All ethics applications must undergo local authoriser review and endorsement before they are submitted to the ethics office for ethics review. This is an automated workflow process actioned by the system upon submission of the application. See detailed steps further below.
Local Authorisers will have a general look at the application, and pay specific attention to the following in their review:
Local authorises are referred to the following guidance document when undertaking their reviews: Local Authoriser guidance - human or animal ethics.pdf
A local authoriser is the person, determined by the local area, as being responsible for reviewing and either endorsing or pushing back ethics applications before they reach the ethics office for ethics review. This person will usually be the Head of School/Department/Centre or the Associate Head of Research.
| Workflow steps for submission to local authoriser
|
Please note: An application is not officially submitted to the ethics office until it has been endorsed by the local authoriser. It is the applicant’s responsibility to allow sufficient time for this endorsement process and to monitor the status of their application during this process. Please refer to the ethics review process and timelines page for more information. |
If an adverse or unexpected event occurs during research or as a result of the research, please use the adverse event report form in RISE - Ethics Monitor. Anyone listed as an investigator can create and submit and adverse event report.
|
How to handle unexpected events |
|
You can refer to the Human Ethics training guide for further information on how to navigate RISE - Ethics monitor, or visit the Ethics Monitor SharePoint site.
Quality assurance or evaluation activities must be reviewed and approved by your relevant Senior Manager, Head of School or Centre Director.
Depending on what is involved with your quality assurance or evaluation activities, there are occasions where ethics approval may also be required. Please use the checklist below to determine if you will need to apply for Ethics approval.
Please review the following guidelines before commencing quality assurance or evaluation activities: