Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31829233›Full record

ArticleTrials2019

Budgeting of non-commercial clinical trials: development of a budget tool by a public funding agency.

Hilde Nevens, Jillian Harrison, France Vrijens, Leen Verleye, Nelle Stocquart, Elisabeth Marynen, Frank Hulstaert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Time in Range as a Research Outcome Measure.Diabetes spectrum : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. 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.

Hilde NevensBelgian Healthcare Knowledge Centre - KCE, Kruidtuinlaan 55, 1000, Brussel, Belgium. hilde.nevens@kce.fgov.be.
Jillian HarrisonBelgian Healthcare Knowledge Centre - KCE, Kruidtuinlaan 55, 1000, Brussel, Belgium.
France VrijensBelgian Healthcare Knowledge Centre - KCE, Kruidtuinlaan 55, 1000, Brussel, Belgium.
Leen VerleyeBelgian Healthcare Knowledge Centre - KCE, Kruidtuinlaan 55, 1000, Brussel, Belgium.
Nelle StocquartBelgian Healthcare Knowledge Centre - KCE, Kruidtuinlaan 55, 1000, Brussel, Belgium.
Elisabeth MarynenBelgian Healthcare Knowledge Centre - KCE, Kruidtuinlaan 55, 1000, Brussel, Belgium.
Frank HulstaertBelgian Healthcare Knowledge Centre - KCE, Kruidtuinlaan 55, 1000, Brussel, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2879-9910

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInvestigator-led multicentre randomised trials are essential to generate evidence on the optimal use of medical interventions. These non-commercial trials are often hampered by underfunding, which may lead to difficulties in gathering a team with the necessary expertise, a delayed trial start, slow recruitment and even early trial discontinuation. As a new public funder of pragmatic clinical trials, the KCE Trials programme was committed to correctly pay all trial activities in order to assure timely delivery of high-quality trial results. As no appropriate trial budget tool was readily publicly available that took into account the costs for the sponsor as well as the costs for participating sites, we developed a tool to make the budgeting of a clinical trial efficient, transparent and fair across applicants.

methodsAll trial-related activities of the sponsor and sites were categorised, and cost drivers were identified. All elements were included in a spreadsheet tool allowing the sponsor team to calculate in detail the various activities of a clinical trial and to appreciate the budget impact of specific cost drivers, e.g. a delay in recruitment. Hourly fees by role were adapted from published data. Fixed amounts per activity were developed when appropriate.

resultsThis publicly available tool has already been used for 17 trials funded since the start of the KCE Trials programme in 2016, and it continues to be used and improved. This budget tool is used together with additional risk-reducing measures such as a multistep selection process with advance payments, a recruitment feasibility check by sponsor and funder, a close monitoring of study progress and a milestone-based payment schedule with the last payment made when the manuscript is submitted.

conclusionsThe budget tool helps the KCE Trials programme to answer relevant research questions in a timely way, within budget and with high quality, a necessary condition to achieve impact of this programme for patients, clinical practice and healthcare payers.

Indexed as

BudgetsResearch DesignCost-Benefit AnalysisCost SavingsFinancing, GovernmentHumansModels, EconomicMulticenter Studies as TopicPublic SectorRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicResearch Support as TopicClinical trial costsClinical trialsCost drivers, pragmaticNon-commercialPublic fundingResource use

Identifiers

PMID31829233
PMCPMC6907219

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.