Ethical Oversight Capacity: Challenges and Policy Implications for Health Research Ethics Committees in Tanzania
1
Bioethics and Health Professionalism, Muhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences (MUHAS), Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania, United Republic of
Popul. Med. 2026;8(Supplement Supplement 1):
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND:
Health Research Ethics Committees (HRECs) are essential for safeguarding the rights, safety, and welfare of research participants. In Tanzania, evidence on HRECs’ operational capacity, governance, and challenges is limited. This study assessed the ethical oversight capacity of all active HRECs to identify strengths, gaps, and policy-relevant considerations.
METHODS:
A convergent mixed-methods design was employed across all ten active HRECs in mainland Tanzania. Quantitative data were collected through structured questionnaires and document reviews of SOPs and institutional policies, evaluating committee membership, administrative capacity, training, infrastructure, and procedural compliance. Qualitative data were obtained via Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) with HREC administrators and secretaries to explore governance, autonomy, operational challenges, and institutional support. Quantitative data were analyzed descriptively, qualitative data underwent thematic analysis, and findings were integrated to triangulate insights.
RESULTS:
HRECs demonstrated strong procedural foundations, with high compliance in administrative operations (94%) and decision-making processes (93%), and well-documented membership structures (86%). Gaps were observed in gender balance, committee independence, and ethics training, with only half of SOPs requiring initial or refresher training. Institutional support was uneven: 70% of committees relied primarily on submission fees, and 40–70% reported infrastructure or digital limitations. KIIs highlighted limited autonomy, operational delays, and resource constraints. Participants reported that decisions often required higher-level endorsement, which caused delays, and emphasized challenges in sustaining training programs and implementing digital systems.
CONCLUSIONS:
Tanzanian HRECs maintain functional ethical review systems but are constrained by limited training, partial autonomy, uneven institutional support, and infrastructure deficits. Strengthening ethical oversight requires national investment in capacity building, mandatory training programs, sustainable financing, and digitalization. Policy interventions should clarify governance structures, enhance institutional support, and promote independent, efficient, and credible ethical review, essential measures for reinforcing public trust in health research.
Health Research Ethics Committees (HRECs) are essential for safeguarding the rights, safety, and welfare of research participants. In Tanzania, evidence on HRECs’ operational capacity, governance, and challenges is limited. This study assessed the ethical oversight capacity of all active HRECs to identify strengths, gaps, and policy-relevant considerations.
METHODS:
A convergent mixed-methods design was employed across all ten active HRECs in mainland Tanzania. Quantitative data were collected through structured questionnaires and document reviews of SOPs and institutional policies, evaluating committee membership, administrative capacity, training, infrastructure, and procedural compliance. Qualitative data were obtained via Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) with HREC administrators and secretaries to explore governance, autonomy, operational challenges, and institutional support. Quantitative data were analyzed descriptively, qualitative data underwent thematic analysis, and findings were integrated to triangulate insights.
RESULTS:
HRECs demonstrated strong procedural foundations, with high compliance in administrative operations (94%) and decision-making processes (93%), and well-documented membership structures (86%). Gaps were observed in gender balance, committee independence, and ethics training, with only half of SOPs requiring initial or refresher training. Institutional support was uneven: 70% of committees relied primarily on submission fees, and 40–70% reported infrastructure or digital limitations. KIIs highlighted limited autonomy, operational delays, and resource constraints. Participants reported that decisions often required higher-level endorsement, which caused delays, and emphasized challenges in sustaining training programs and implementing digital systems.
CONCLUSIONS:
Tanzanian HRECs maintain functional ethical review systems but are constrained by limited training, partial autonomy, uneven institutional support, and infrastructure deficits. Strengthening ethical oversight requires national investment in capacity building, mandatory training programs, sustainable financing, and digitalization. Policy interventions should clarify governance structures, enhance institutional support, and promote independent, efficient, and credible ethical review, essential measures for reinforcing public trust in health research.
| eISSN: | 2654-1459 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
