Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31193608›Full record

ArticleContemporary clinical trials communications2019

Trends in clinical trial investigator workforce and turnover: An analysis of the U.S. FDA 1572 BMIS database.

Christopher B Fordyce, Matthew T Roe, Christine Pierre, Terri Hinkley, Gerrit Hamre, Pamela Tenaerts, Jonathan McCall, James D Topping

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Contemporary clinical trials communications, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Frontier sites in clinical trials: Opportunities, challenges, and models.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Christopher B FordyceDuke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC, USA.
Matthew T RoeDuke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC, USA.
Christine PierreSociety for Clinical Research Sites, Ellicott City, MD, USA.
Terri HinkleyAcademy of Medical-Surgical Nurses, Sewell, NJ, USA.
Gerrit HamreClinical Trials Transformation Initiative, Durham, NC, USA.
Pamela TenaertsClinical Trials Transformation Initiative, Durham, NC, USA.
Jonathan McCallDuke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC, USA.
James D ToppingDuke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC, USA.
Clinical Research Institute · USUniversity of British Columbia · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHigh turnover rates among clinical trial investigators contribute to inefficiency, instability, and increased costs for the clinical research enterprise; however, factors contributing to investigator turnover have not been well characterized.

methodsUsing information from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Bioresearch Monitoring Information System (BMIS), we examined trends in the overall clinical investigator workforce and within specific "phenotypes" as well as differences by investigator location (U.S.-based vs. non-U.S.-based). We identified unique investigators within the database, stratifying them into one of three "phenotypes": those with one Form FDA1572 submission across the study interval ("one-and-done"); those with two or more submissions but with substantial intervals between trials ("stop-and-go"); and those with two or more submissions and continuous involvement in multiple trials ("stayers").

resultsOf the 172,453 unique investigators who submitted a Form FDA 1572 during the study interval (1999-2015), 85,455 were classified as "one-and-done" investigators; 21,768 as "stop-and-go" investigators; and 65,231 as "stayer" investigators. The total number of investigators declined across the study interval. Among all subgroups, only "one-and-done" investigators showed growth across the study period, largely driven by increases in non-U.S.-based investigators. "Stop-and-go" investigators showed declines for both U.S.-based and non-U.S.-based investigators, as did "stayers," who showed the largest absolute and proportional declines of all subgroups.

conclusionsFrom 1999 to 2015, investigators submitting a Form FDA 1572 to the BMIS database declined by approximately one-third and the proportion of investigators involved in only one trial increased, signaling potential adverse trends in the clinical investigator workforce. Strategies for sustaining investigator engagement warrant further exploration.

Indexed as

Drug trialsFDAInvestigator turnover

Identifiers

PMID31193608
PMCPMC6536616
OpenAlexW2945328036

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.