{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022895622895622896, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.460869565217391, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Research ethics review practices: experiences of the Armauer Hansen Research Institute/All Africa Leprosy and Tuberculosis Rehabilitation and Training Center Ethics Review Committee, Ethiopia.

The need for ethics review committees (ERCs) is imperative in the conduct of research to ensure the protection of the rights, safety and well-being of research participants. However, the capacities of most ERCs in Africa are limited in terms of trained experts, competence, resources as well as standard operating procedures. The aim of this report is to share experiences of one of the local institutional ERCs, the Armauer Hansen Research Institute (AHRI)/All Africa Leprosy and Tuberculosis Rehabilitation and Training Center (ALERT) Ethics Review Committee (AAERC), to other ERCs found in academic and research institutions in the Country. In this report, we used an empirical approach to review archived documents of the AAERC Secretariat to assess the Committee's strengths and weaknesses. The experiences of the AAERC in terms of its composition, routine work activities, learning practices and pitfalls that require general attention are summarized. In spite of this summary, the Committee strongly acknowledges the functions and roles of other ERCs in the Country. In addition, an independent assessment of the Committee's activity in general is warranted to evaluate its performance and further assess the level of awareness or oversights among researchers about the roles of ERCs.