ArticleContemporary clinical trials2012
Why providers participate in clinical trials: considering the National Cancer Institute's Community Clinical Oncology Program.
Article in Contemporary clinical trials, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Pharmacist-Led Deprescribing of Opioids and Benzodiazepines in Older Adults: Examining Implementation and Perceptions.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Tracing the potential of networks to improve community cancer care: an in-depth single case study.Implementation science communications · 2021Article
- Music Therapist Experiences of a Randomized Controlled Trial as Clinician Researchers.Journal of music therapy · 2020Article
- Site Principal Investigators in Multicenter Clinical Trials: Appropriately Recognizing Key Contributors.Circulation · 2017Article
- Attitudes of small animal practitioners toward participation in veterinary clinical trials.Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe translation of research evidence into practice is facilitated by clinical trials such as those sponsored by the National Cancer Institute's Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP) that help disseminate cancer care innovations to community-based physicians and provider organizations. However, CCOP participation involves unsubsidized costs and organizational challenges that raise concerns about sustained provider participation in clinical trials.
objectivesThis study was designed to improve our understanding of why providers participate in the CCOP in order to inform the decision-making process of administrators, clinicians, organizations, and policy-makers considering CCOP participation. RESEARCH
methodsWe conducted a multi-site qualitative study of five provider organizations engaged with the CCOP. We interviewed 41 administrative and clinician key informants, asking about what motivated CCOP participation, and what benefits they associated with involvement. We deductively and inductively analyzed verbatim interview transcripts, and explored themes that emerged.
resultsInterviewees expressed both "altruistic" and "self-interested" motives for CCOP participation. Altruistic reasons included a desire to increase access to clinical trials and feeling an obligation to patients. Self-interested reasons included the desire to enhance reputation, and a need to integrate disparate cancer care activities. Perceived benefits largely matched expressed motives for CCOP participation, and included internal and external benefits to the organization, and quality of care benefits for both patients and participating physicians.
conclusionThe motives and benefits providers attributed to CCOP participation are consistent with translational research goals, offering evidence that participation can contribute value to providers by expanding access to innovative medical care for patients in need.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.