Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27025840›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2016

Academic pediatric clinical research: factors associated with study implementation duration.

Delphine Meier-Girard, Annick Tibi, Hendy Abdoul, Sonia Prot-Labarthe, Françoise Brion, Olivier Bourdon, Corinne Alberti

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

7 authors.

Delphine Meier-GirardUniversité Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, UMR-1123 ECEVE, F-75019, Paris, France. delphine.gd@gmail.com.
Annick TibiUniversité Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, F-75270, Paris, France.
Hendy AbdoulUniversité Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, UMR-1123 ECEVE, F-75019, Paris, France.
Sonia Prot-LabartheUniversité Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, UMR-1123 ECEVE, F-75019, Paris, France.
Françoise BrionUniversité Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, F-75270, Paris, France.
Olivier BourdonUniversité Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, F-75270, Paris, France.
Corinne AlbertiUniversité Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, UMR-1123 ECEVE, F-75019, Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe ethical, methodological, and technical aspects of pediatric research, often results in complications and delays in implementation. Our objective was to identify factors associated with the implementation duration of hospital-based pediatric studies.

methodsAll hospital-based pediatric studies sponsored by AP-HP between 2002 and 2008 were retrospectively identified. Association of the funding mechanism and methodological factors with the implementation duration was assessed using a multivariable mixed linear model. Pharmaceutical factors were explored as part of a subgroup analysis restricted to the studies involving drug therapy. Given that we took an exploratory approach, factors associated with implementation duration with p < 0.10 were kept in the final models.

resultsA total of 139 studies were evaluated. The median implementation duration was 17.1 months (range: 0.9-55.3 months), and tended to increase over time (from 14.9 [25(th) percentile-75(th) percentile: 11.5-19.9] months in 2002 to 23.7 [15.2-31.0] months in 2008, p = 0.01). External (coefficient [95 % confidence interval]: -7.7 [-11.9;-3.5] months, p < 0.001) and internal funding (-5.3 95 % CI [-9.8;-0.8], p = 0.02) compared to governmental funding and number of centers (-0.1 95 % CI[-0.2;0.02] months for 1 center increase, p = 0.07) were associated with reduced duration, whereas interventional study (either involving drug therapy (6.0 95 % CI[0.7;11.3] months, p = 0.03 or not (3.5 95 % CI[-0.3;7.3] months, p = 0.06) was associated with increased duration compared to observational study. Regarding the 35 studies involving drug therapy, external funding decreased duration (-6.7 95 % CI[-13.2;-0.2] months, p = 0.05), whereas studies involving solely a pediatric population (7.8 95 % CI[1.1;14.5] months, p = 0.01) (compared to mixed adult-pediatric population), a placebo-controlled design (6.6 95 % CI[0.9;12.3] months, p = 0.01), and inappropriate drug formulation for at least one drug used in the study (6.9 95 % CI[-0.2;14.0] months, p = 0.06) were associated with increased duration.

conclusionImplementation of hospital-based pediatric studies primarily faced delays when they were interventional and, in particular, when they involved drug therapy. Regarding the latter, difficulties that resulted in delayed studies arose with respect to the supply of drugs and placebo in age-appropriate dosages and route of administration. Therefore, difficulties related to the use of pharmaceuticals need to be anticipated earlier in order to avoid implementation delays.

Indexed as

Academic Medical CentersHealth Plan ImplementationBiomedical ResearchFemaleFranceHospitals, PediatricHumansLinear ModelsMaleMultivariate AnalysisNeeds AssessmentPediatricsRisk FactorsTime FactorsAcademic medical centersBiomedical researchDelay in studies implementationPediatrics

Identifiers

PMID27025840
PMCPMC4812626

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.