ArticleClinical and translational science2013
Evaluating various areas of process improvement in an effort to improve clinical research: discussions from the 2012 Clinical Translational Science Award (CTSA) Clinical Research Management workshop.
Article in Clinical and translational science, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Building process improvement capacity in epidemiologic research operations: the Nurses' Health Studies experience.American journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
- Simplifying informed consent as a universal precaution.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Beyond standard data collection - the promise and potential of BRAIN (Brain tumour Registry Australia INnovation and translation registry).BMC cancer · 2022Article
- Registry-based trials: a potential model for cost savings?Cardiology in the young · 2020Article
- The Alzheimer's Prevention Registry: A Large Internet-Based Participant Recruitment Registry to Accelerate Referrals to Alzheimer's-Focused Studies.The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease · 2020Article
- Heart Failure Site-Based Research in the United States: Results of the Heart Failure Society of America Research Network Survey.JACC. Heart failure · 2019Article
- GeneMatch: A novel recruitment registry using at-home APOE genotyping to enhance referrals to Alzheimer's prevention studies.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2019Article
- Systems approach to assessing and improving local human research Institutional Review Board performance.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2018Article
- Research START: A Multimethod Study of Barriers and Accelerators of Recruiting Research Participants.Clinical and translational science · 2015Article
- Applying Process Improvement Methods to Clinical and Translational Research: Conceptual Framework and Case Examples.Clinical and translational science · 2015Article
- Using registries to recruit subjects for clinical trials.Contemporary clinical trials · 2015Article
- A personalized Institutional Review Board Liaison Service: Evaluation over its initial 30 months.International journal of academic medicineArticle
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
Emphasis has been placed on assessing the efficiency of clinical and translational research as part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) goal to "improve human health." Improvements identified and implemented by individual organizations cannot address the research infrastructure needs of all clinical and translational research conducted. NIH's National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) has brought together 61 Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) sites creating a virtual national laboratory that reflects the diversity and breadth of academic medical centers to collectively improve clinical and translational science. The annual Clinical Research Management workshop is organized by the CTSA consortium with participation from CTSA awardees, NIH, and others with an interest in clinical research management. The primary objective of the workshop is to disseminate information that improves clinical research management although the specific objectives of each workshop evolve within the consortium. The fifth annual workshop entitled "Learning by doing; applying evidence-based tools to re-engineer clinical research management" took place in June 2012. The primary objective of the 2012 workshop was to utilize data to evaluate, modify, and improve clinical research management. This report provides a brief summary of the workshop proceedings and the major themes discussed among the participants.
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.