Evidence map›Paper›PMID 14689812›Full record

ArticlePharmacy world & science : PWS2003

Investigator barriers and preferences to conduct clinical drug trials in Finland: a qualitative study.

Tuija Keinonen, Tapani Keränen, Timo Klaukka, Veijof Saano, Pauli Ylitalo, Hannes Enlund

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmacy world & science : PWS, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Tuija KeinonenDepartment of Pharmacology and Toxicology, University of Kuopio, P.O. Box 1627, 70211 Kuopio, Finland. tuija.keinonen@medifiles.fi
Tapani Keränen
Timo Klaukka
Veijof Saano
Pauli Ylitalo
Hannes Enlund
University of Eastern Finland · FIFinnish Medicines Agency Fimea · FISocial Insurance Institution · FITampere University · FITampere University Hospital · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo explore investigator barriers, preferences, and attitudes towards conducting clinical trials in Finland.

methodIn-depth, semi-structured interviews with 20 clinicians working in the field of cardiovascular medicine were performed. The interviews were audiotaped, transcribed verbatim and analysed qualitatively. Twenty clinicians from all (five) university hospitals in Finland and from three subgroups: 1) with long experience, 2) with limited experience and 3) reluctant to carry out clinical trials, were sampled purposefully.

main outcome measuresBarriers and (de)motivating factors in carrying out clinical trials and need for training in Good Clinical Practice (GCP).

resultsOverall, the investigators had a positive attitude towards conducting clinical trials. The major barriers seemed to occur at the beginning of the trial: bureaucracy, lack of time and laboriousness. The informants hoped for more specific inhouse rules and flexibility in hospitals. The greatest investigator barriers were insufficient financial incentives, trial-related reasons and administrative affairs/bureaucracy. The smallest barriers were reported in subject recruitment, clinical work, documentation, investigational product logistics and communication with ethics committees. Financial incentives, a possibility to incorporate a personal sub-study or other benefits for personal research and scientific and clinical interest in the trial were reported as the most motivating factors. Carrying out studies in practice and an opportunity to participate in a trial during one's postgraduate specialist education were considered beneficial. Training in GCP, mainly in the course of postgraduate education, and a certificate or equivalent were generally considered necessary, although a voluntary system was preferred.

conclusionThe interviews of clinicians provide valuable information about the barriers and preferences related to the practical implementation of clinical trials. If the trial is scientifically/clinically interesting and involves a small administrative burden and sufficient financial compensation, investigators are motivated to participate. The barriers and preferences should be considered in decision-making, to meet the various needs of all parties involved and to produce high-quality GCP-compliant clinical drug research. This would ensure the availability of sufficient conditions to carry out clinical trials also in the future.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelClinical Trials as TopicDrug IndustryDrugs, InvestigationalFinlandHospitals, UniversityHumansMotivationResearch PersonnelDrugs, Investigational

Identifiers

PMID14689812
OpenAlexW2118576086

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.