Researcher Awareness and Submission Practices to Ethics Committees in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) and Research Ethics Committees (RECs) are central to safeguarding ethical obligations in research, yet awareness and submission practices among researchers in Saudi Arabia remain inconsistent. This study explored researchers’ awareness, submission methodologies, perceived barriers, and possible improvements to the IRB process. An electronic cross-sectional survey was distributed to 915 researchers across Saudi academic and research institutions, with 870 valid responses analyzed. The questionnaire covered demographics, awareness of ethical principles, submission practices, barriers, and recommendations. Data were examined using descriptive statistics and chi-square tests, with Cramer’s V used to indicate effect sizes. Results showed that prior submission experience was significantly associated with higher awareness of research ethics (87.3% vs. 49.4%, χ²(2) = 149.40, p < 0.001, Cramer’s V = 0.414). Institutional support also had a modest but significant effect on perceptions of submission ease (χ²(16) = 195.75, p < 0.001, Cramer’s V = 0.237). Formal ethics training demonstrated a moderate effect on confidence in applying protocols (78.2% vs. 48.5%, χ²(1) = 80.32, p < 0.001, Cramer’s V = 0.304). Barriers commonly reported included unclear procedures, bureaucratic delays, and limited supervisory guidance, while qualitative analysis highlighted recurring concerns regarding procedural complexity. Despite a well-established regulatory framework, practical gaps in awareness and submission practices persist. Researcher-driven recommendations such as structured training, simplified digital platforms, and stronger supervisory involvement could enhance compliance and reinforce integrity as a core scientific value in research practice.