Institutional Review Committee (IRC) of Patan Academy of Health Sciences (PAHS) is an independent body constituted of medical and non-medical members to serve the patients, staff and community of PAHS, Nepal and abroad. The IRC-PAHS will try best review when requested the ethics of research proposals involving research related to human subjects at PAHS and its surrounding community submitted by members of staff, students, or associated workers belonging or affiliated to PAHS and collaborating research with other institutions in an outside country; to protect the subjects (volunteers or patients) from possible harm or danger, to preserve their rights, and to reassure the community (and sponsoring organizations) that this is being done; to ensure that Research Protocols are consistent with the application and interpretation, of the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki, CIOMS and Nuffield Council for Bio-ethics; to ensure any other ethical issues concerning patient care in the hospital.
Please be advised that your submission will be RETURNED WITHOUT REVIEW if any of the following mandatory documents are missing, incomplete, or improperly prepared at the time of submission. All documents must be uploaded in the Supporting Documents section of the IRERP electronic submission system.
The following documents are MANDATORY for all submissions:
1. Good Clinical Practice (GCP) / Research Ethics Training Certificate — A valid certificate of completion of research ethics or GCP training for all listed investigators. The certificate must be current (not expired) and issued by a recognised institution. This document is required while making your profile.
2. Informed Consent Form (ICF) — A complete Informed Consent Form in both English and Nepali languages, prepared in accordance with NHRC 2022 guidelines. The form must be participant-friendly, written in plain language, and include all required elements.
3. Assent Form — Where the study involves participants who are minors (below 18 years) or individuals with diminished autonomy, a separate Assent Form in both English and Nepali languages must be provided. The assent form must be age-appropriate, written in simple language that the participant can understand, and must be accompanied by the parent/guardian consent form.
4. Participant Information Sheet (PIS) — A separate Participant Information Sheet in both English and Nepali languages. The information sheet must clearly explain the nature of the study, its purpose, procedures, risks, benefits, and participants' rights.
5. Approval from Head of Department / Higher Authority — A signed approval letter from the Head of Department or from the authority one level above for executive-level applicants, confirming departmental endorsement of the proposed research.
6. Declaration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Use — A signed declaration stating whether or not AI-assisted tools were used in the preparation of the research protocol, study instruments, or any submission documents. If AI was used, the nature and extent of use must be described.
7. Declaration of Conflict of Interest — A signed declaration by the Principal Investigator and all co-investigators disclosing any financial, professional, or personal conflicts of interest, or explicitly stating that no conflict of interest exists.
8. For student's thesis, full proposal signed by guide and coguide is also required.
Submissions that are found to be missing any of the above documents will be returned to the author with a written notification. The submission will need to be resubmitted in full after all required documents have been attached.
The PAHS-IRC ethical review process views research as an open and evolving pursuit of knowledge, where ethical frameworks guide and enable rather than restrict inquiry. It combines rigor with academic freedom, treating review as both oversight and a developmental process that strengthens quality, integrity, and relevance while encouraging innovation and critical thinking. Overall, it functions as a collaborative space where iterative feedback and reflection co-construct knowledge and foster continuous scholarly growth.
What do reviewer see in ethical review process
Consent form, information sheet, confidentiality, vulnerable population
Harm and benefit to the participant
Conflict of interest, plagiarism, AI declaration
Title of the study
Identification of research Gap
Rationale scientifically addressing the components of gap
Clarity on the objective of the study
Sample size with justification and aligning with objectives
Research tool, its validity and reliability
Alignment of Title, Rationale, Objectives, sample size, research tool and dummy table.
Dummy table representing each objective of the study
Additionally in case of qualitative inquiry: Clear Axiology, Ontology, Epistemology, Positionality, Paradigm, Trustworthiness, Data collection and management plan
The average time required for processing is EIGHT weeks.
The IRC at PAHS processes more than 200 research proposals in a year. This is a substantial workload that is managed by a voluntary committee alongside the full-time professional and academic responsibilities of its members. The IRC Secretariat is committed to processing submissions as efficiently as possible; however, the following are the most common reasons why proposals are delayed, and researchers are urged to take these into account:
Please go through the following video. Reviewing the following video will help you to be used to the submission environment.
These are the documents required for ethical clearance. Please download this document, complete it and prepare for upload in the system (during submission process)
This is a template document. Each step has instruction. It is easier to fill up this document, revise it and then fill up the online system. However, if you are used to online submission, you can go to step 3 directly.
Before going through this link, please make sure that you have watched video and the required documents as per step 1 is ready.
If you have any query, please contact at
irc-pahs@pahs.edu.np