{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03787878787878788, 'fraction_numerical': 0.020833333333333332, 'mean_word_length': 5.096153846153846, '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}}
[Perception and satisfaction of main researchers on the management of a Clinical Research Ethics Committee].

PURPOSE
To analyze the main researchers (MR) perception and satisfaction associated to face-to-face project presentation as well as Clinical Research Ethics Committee (CREC) functions related to administrative and advisement aspects.


METHODS
Descriptive study performed during nine months (January to September 2011) through voluntary participation questionnaire given to MR who assisted to CREC meetings. The questionnaire contained a numeric range (1-10) and open issues to evaluate the presentation process, the satisfaction of CREC functions considering bureaucratic aspects, ethics, scientific-methodological, legal recommendations and its global function. Descriptive statistics and Student test were performed.


RESULTS
The questionnaire was answered by 36 (95%) of total MR. Average score obtained in the evaluation of face-to-face study presentation was 9.2 (SD 0.9). In reference to legal issues an average punctuation of 7.1 (DE 0.4) was obtained, whereas ethics and scientific-methodological aspects scored 8.2 (DE 0.2 and 0.4). Global average evaluation about CREC tasks was 8.6 (SD 1.0). A positive assessment related to attend to the project presentation was made for 22 (61%) of the MR.


CONCLUSIONS
The study showed a high satisfaction of CREC operation and a high evaluation of face-to-face project presentation. There were detected further improvement aspects to optimize CREC meetings, taking into account the effort developed by MR and CREC members.