BACKGROUND: We investigated how relevant and responsive scientists and research ethics committee (REC) members considered the research protocol review processes for health research practice in Uganda. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with five scientists and five REC members. Data were analysed thematically. RESULTS: How much to compensate for time, the amount of study information shared with volunteers and sample storage for future unknown research were areas of concern for REC members. Delays in getting feedback concerned scientists. CONCLUSIONS: Researchers and REC members need to hold regular discussions to ensure the review process is relevant and responsive.