Monitoring CROs [BE/BA News]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2014-12-07 15:08 (3868 d 09:30 ago) – Posting: # 13999
Views: 22,688

Hi ElMaestro,

❝ As a private auditor you cannot write you have detected fraud.


Why not? The sponsor should be happy that I detected it and not an inspector years later. I had three cases in my career (stupid mistakes – not fraud). The studies were repeated. In two cases CROs repeated studies for free and in one the net costs where shared 50/50 (because the sponsor could have detected the mistake during his monitoring; I discovered a mistake in the randomization after the study was completed).

❝ You will end up with a bunch of lawyers fees to pay.


Why?

❝ Writing that you see conduct which may not be fully compatible with the principles of GCP blah blah is what most have to resort to.


Why?

❝ Second, actually realising fraud is present is not always completely easy. Let me show you, say, 10 ECGs of which 3 come from the same person sampled 2 minutes apart. Do you think you would see it?


No way. But: I have heard about ECGs where in the PDFs the subject-ID was edited in Acrobat. Stupidly the edited ID was in Arial and everything else in Courier. I guess I would be able to see this.

❝ If you answer yes …


I don’t – though I have some sympathies for idiot savants.

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна! [image]
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,430 posts in 4,931 threads, 1,673 registered users;
44 visitors (0 registered, 44 guests [including 13 identified bots]).
Forum time: 01:39 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

To know that we know what we know,
and to know that we do not know what we do not know,
that is true knowledge.    Nicolaus Copernicus

The Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5