Skip to Content

Review checklist

OverviewMerit and integrity (NS 1.1–1.3)Justice (NS 1.4–1.5)Beneficence (NS 1.6–1.9)Respect (NS 1.10–1.13)ConsentData managementSpecial considerationsRelated resources

This article is part of the Iris Ethics Knowledge Base; you can find a directory of all articles here.

Overview

This checklist is designed for use by Iris Ethics reviewers when assessing research applications. It follows the structure of the National Statement's core ethical principles, then works through consent, risk, data management, and special considerations.

Merit and integrity (NS 1.1–1.3)

  • Is the purpose of the research clear and does it have the potential to contribute to knowledge or practice (see Merit (NS 1.1-1.2))?
  • Is the study design appropriate to the research questions, and are the researchers qualified to conduct the research competently (see Integrity (NS 1.3))?
  • Are adequate resources available to complete the research as designed?
  • Have any conflicts of interest been declared (NS 5.3.11)?

Justice (NS 1.4–1.5)

  • Is the selection, inclusion and exclusion of participants fair, and not based on convenience alone (see Justice (NS 1.4-1.5))?
  • Do the burdens of participation and the benefits of the research fall reasonably on the same population, rather than burdening one group to benefit another?
  • Does recruitment avoid unfairly targeting populations that are easy to access or recruit rather than populations for whom the research is most relevant?

Beneficence (NS 1.6–1.9)

  • Have all foreseeable risks been identified, and are they justified by the potential benefits to participants, the community, or knowledge (see Beneficence (NS 1.6-1.9))?
  • Are appropriate mitigation strategies in place for each identified risk?
  • Has the risk level (harm vs discomfort) been correctly assessed for review pathway purposes (see Assessing risk levels)?

Respect (NS 1.10–1.13)

  • Does the consent process respect participants' capacity to make their own decisions, including a clear right to withdraw (see Respect (NS 1.10-1.13))?
  • Are the privacy and confidentiality of participants adequately protected?
  • Where participants have diminished autonomy or capacity, are additional protections in place?

Consent

  • Does the participant information meet the requirements of NS 2.2.2 (see Assessing consent adequacy)?
  • Is the consent mechanism appropriate for the context and population, and free from coercion or undue inducement?
  • Is the right to withdraw clearly communicated?

Data management

  • Is data collection limited to what is necessary for the research?
  • Are storage and security arrangements adequate?
  • Has re-identification risk been adequately assessed?
  • Is the data retention and destruction plan adequate?

Special considerations

  • Do any NS Chapter 4 provisions apply (specific populations, contexts, or techniques)?
  • Are the relevant additional requirements from NS Chapter 4 addressed?

Related resources

This page was last updated on 16 September 2026.

Was this helpful? We'd appreciate your feedback!

This article makes reference to the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research 2025. It is intended as practical guidance and does not constitute legal advice.

AI Disclosure: Resources in this library were prepared using Large Language Models with input from Iris Ethics staff who guided the scope and design. Subsequent revisions and final versions were developed and approved by Iris Ethics staff.