Screening for illicit drugs [Design Issues]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2018-01-16 13:44 (2729 d 03:28 ago) – Posting: # 18179
Views: 8,201

Hi Norah,

there are no well-defined rules. But I assure you that you don't want to be in a situation where you haven't done it and it then causes issue downstream. It is going to be your problem and the sponsor's problem regardless of IEC+regulatory approval.
Section 3 of ICH E6 in a way gives the IEC/IRB some "responsibility" for rights, well-being, safety of trial participants. In practice though this is a bit messy and does not mean the CROs/Sponsor's responsibility is offloaded on a bureaucratic parallel universe if something happens.

Chest Xray and ECG are a bit in the same category. They are not done routinely in certain parts of Asia.

I don't know where the limit is. You can die from infection from an in-grown toe nail, yet I never saw any source or CRF mentioning a specific check for this condition was done. :-)

Pass or fail!
ElMaestro

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,428 posts in 4,929 threads, 1,681 registered users;
104 visitors (0 registered, 104 guests [including 19 identified bots]).
Forum time: 18:13 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

No matter what side of the argument you are on,
you always find people on your side
that you wish were on the other.    Thomas Berger

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