Ethics applications

Before any recruitment of participants, or any data can be collected, you must ensure you have received ethics approval. When you are in the early stages of planning your research, you need to consider the timeframes for the ethics processes – these will vary depending on a number of factors such as time of year, the quality of your application, and the risk category of your research.

When you submit your ethics application, we will do a preliminary check for completeness – to see that the application has been filled out sufficiently and that supporting documentation has been provided so that we can triage your application to one of the following categories. Any incomplete applications will be returned to you requesting additional information.

At Curtin, we refer to the risk levels as negligible (minimal) risk, low risk, and non-low risk. We also have an exemption process, where certain studies which meet specific requirements, (as outlined in the National Statement 5.1.17) can be exempt from ethical review. Additionally, we have a reciprocal process for studies that have already gone through an ethical review process at another institution.

• Negligible risk
• Low risk
• Non-low risk
• Reciprocal approvals
• Exemptions
• Supporting documents

Negligible risk review

The lowest risk level for human research is called negligible risk – research where there is no foreseeable risk of harm or discomfort but may have potential for minor burden or inconvenience.

This could include things such as completing interviews or surveys on topics that aren’t likely to cause any distress or upset.

Once the complete application has been received, a negligible risk application will be reviewed by the Ethics office in order that they are received. This process can take between 1-3 weeks, depending on a number of factors, such as busy periods of the year.

We will advise whether your application has been approved, approved with special conditions, or not yet approved with minor amendments or major amendments to be made.

Low risk review

Research that is more than inconvenience to participants and which may involve risk of discomfort is considered Low Risk. These applications will need to be reviewed by a Low-Risk Reviewer from within your School or Faculty, or with relevant subject matter knowledge to conduct the review.

Low risk research is research in which the only foreseeable risk to participants is discomfort, rather than harm. Discomfort may include emotional, psychological or physical discomfort that is temporary, mild and unlikely to have lasting consequences. Examples of low risk research include interviews or focus groups discussing personal or potentially sensitive experiences, completion of questionnaires on topics that may cause mild emotional distress, collection of non-invasive biological samples (such as saliva or cheek swabs), or non-invasive physiological measurements where participation may be uncomfortable but is not expected to result in harm. Research where there is any foreseeable risk of harm to participants is not considered low risk and requires a higher level of ethical review, see non-low risk below.

The time frame for a low-risk review can be between 3 – 6 weeks. Busy periods throughout the year and the availability of low-risk reviewers and can affect how long this process will take.

Non-low risk/full committee review (HREC)

Research in which the risk for participants or others is greater than discomfort is considered Non-Low risk research. Research in this category carries risk of harm and is therefore considered higher risk research that requires review by a Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC)

Research is generally considered greater than low, or risk where there is a foreseeable risk of harm. Some examples include:

• Physical or clinical interventions with the potential for injury, pain or adverse effects.
• Procedures or topics likely to cause significant psychological distress or emotional harm.
• Deception that could expose participants to harm or affect informed consent.
• Activities that could expose participants to social, legal, economic or reputational harm.
• Disclosure of illegal activities or other information that could have legal consequences.
• Studies involving vulnerable participants where the likelihood or severity of harm is increased.
• Use of identifiable genomic or genetic information that may pose risks to participants or their relatives.
• International or culturally sensitive contexts where participation may expose individuals to heightened risks.

Please note that the deadlines listed are for complete applications – if there are documents or information missing from your application we will advise you what you need to provide, however we need to receive everything before the deadline. Therefore, we recommend submitting your application prior to the deadline, to allow time for this process if necessary. Applications that miss the deadline for a committee meeting will be considered for the following meeting.

Reciprocal approvals

If your research has already been through an ethical review process and has been approved by another Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) within Australia (and that is registered with the NHMRC), then you should apply for Reciprocal approval.  The National Statement states that duplication of ethical should be avoided, therefore if you are able to provide evidence from another NHMRC registered HREC of the approval, we can reciprocate that approval at Curtin.

In these cases, we just need for the approval letter from the lead HREC, and the application form that was submitted to the lead HREC to be uploaded with the Reciprocal Approval application form in InfoEd.

We need to see at least one of the researchers in the InfoEd application are listed on the lead HREC approval letter or application. We do not need to review supporting documents such as PIFs, consent forms and other documents if they have already been approved by the lead HREC.

If the study has been reviewed and approved by an international HREC, you can still apply for reciprocal approval through InfoEd. However, in these circumstances you do need to upload:

• the approval letter
• the full application that was submitted to the approving institution
• all supporting documents approved by the approving institution

If we can determine that the approving institution has at least the minimum ethical standards as the National Statement, we can reciprocate the ethics approval.

Note: Whilst we have the ability to reciprocate overseas ethics boards’ approvals, we must be satisfied the ethics review meets the minimum standards of the NHMRC National Statement. Otherwise, a full ethics review is warranted through the Curtin Human Research Ethics Committee.

Things to consider 

• An ethics exemption is not an ethics approval. You won’t receive an HRE2026-xxxx approval number, but an exemption number EX8xxxx. 
• Some journals will not allow you to publish if your research has not received ethics approval.  
• We don’t recommend that researchers change their research solely to fit into an exemption category.