ArticleBMC medical research methodology2016
Patient enrollment and logistical problems top the list of difficulties in clinical research: a cross-sectional survey.
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 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Study design factors influencing patients' willingness to participate in clinical research: a randomised vignette-based study.BMC medical research methodology · 2020Trial
- Vietnamese University Students' Perceptions and Attitudes Toward Participation in Clinical Research: Mixed Methods Study.Journal of participatory medicine · 2026Article
- Exploring UVA1-Induced Metabolic Effects in Different In Vitro, Ex Vivo, and In Vivo Systems.Metabolites · 2026Article
- Screening failure in systemic sclerosis randomized trials: reporting, rates, causes and trends over time.Rheumatology advances in practice · 2026Article
- Operational determinants of recruitment and biospecimen collection in translational observational studies: a multi-site comparative analysis.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Development of a protocol complexity tool: a framework designed to stimulate discussion and simplify study design.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- Prospective Preference Assessment of a Pharmacological Clinical Trial to Alter the Progression of Posttraumatic Osteoarthritis After ACL Reconstruction.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2025Article
- ELaPro, a LOINC-mapped core dataset for top laboratory procedures of eligibility screening for clinical trials.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Article
- Factors influencing the statistical planning, design, conduct, analysis and reporting of trials in health care: A systematic review.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2022Review
- The University of Minnesota's Clinical Research Support Center Feasibility Review: An objective protocol assessment carving a pathway to study success.The journal of research administration · 2022Article
- Declining Use of Corticosteroids for Crohn's Disease Has Implications for Study Recruitment: Results of a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2021Article
- Microphysiological systems for the modeling of wound healing and evaluation of pro-healing therapies.Journal of materials chemistry. B · 2020Review
- Factors associated with patient willingness to participate in anaesthesia clinical trials: a vignette-based cross-sectional study.BMC medical research methodology · 2020Article
- Acceptability of a German multicentre healthcare research study: a survey of research personnels' attitudes, experiences and work load.BMJ open · 2018Observational
- Transgenerational and intergenerational epigenetic inheritance in allergic diseases.The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology · 2018Review
- Increasing protocol suitability for clinical trials in sub-Saharan Africa: a mixed methods study.Global health research and policy · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany medical research projects encounter difficulties. The objective of this study was to assess the self-reported frequency of difficulties encountered by medical researchers while conducting research and to identify factors associated with their occurrence.
methodsThe authors conducted a cross-sectional survey in 2010 among principal investigators of 996 study protocols approved by the Research Ethics Committee in Geneva, Switzerland, between 2001 and 2005. The authors asked principal investigators to rate the level of difficulty (1: none, to 5: very great) encountered across the research process.
results588 questionnaires were sent back (participation rate 59.0 %). 391 (66.5 %) studies were completed at the time of the survey. Investigators reported that the most frequent difficulties were related to patient enrollment (44.3 %), data collection (26.7 %), data analysis and interpretation (21.5 %), collaboration with caregivers (21.0 %), study design (20.4 %), publication in peer-reviewed journal (20.2 %), hiring of competent study personnel (20.2 %), and getting funding (19.2 %). On average, investigators reported 2.8 difficulties per project (SD 2.8, range 0 to 12). In multivariable analysis, the number of difficulties was higher for studies initiated by public sponsors (vs. private), single center studies (vs. multicenter), and studies about treatment, diagnosis or prognosis (i.e., clinical vs. other studies).
conclusionsMedical researchers reported substantial logistical difficulties in conducting clinical research.
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.