Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32393574›Full record

ReviewESMO open2020

ESMO Clinical Research Observatory (ECRO): improving the efficiency of clinical research through rationalisation of bureaucracy.

Jose Luis Perez-Gracia, Ahmad Awada, Emiliano Calvo, Teresa Amaral, Hendrik-Tobias Arkenau, Viktor Gruenwald, Gyorgy Bodoky, Martijn P Lolkema, Massimo Di Nicola, Nicolas Penel and 3 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in ESMO open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

13 authors.

Jose Luis Perez-GraciaDepartment of Oncology, University Clinic of Navarra and Health Research Institute of Navarra (IdiSNA), Pamplona, SpainPamplona, Spain. Electronic address: jlgracia@unav.es.
Ahmad AwadaDepartment of Oncology Medicine, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Emiliano CalvoSTART Madrid-CIOCC, Centro Integral Oncológico Clara Campal, Hospital Universitario HM Sanchinarro, Madrid, Spain.
Teresa AmaralInterdisciplinary Skin Cancer Center, University Medical Center, Tuebingen, Germany.
Hendrik-Tobias ArkenauSarah Cannon Research Institute and University College, London, United Kingdom.
Viktor GruenwaldInterdisciplinary Genitourinary Oncology at the West-German Cancer Center, Clinic for Internal Medicine (Tumor Research) and Clinic for Urology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Gyorgy BodokyDepartment of Oncology, St László Teaching Hospital, Budapest, Hungary.
Martijn P LolkemaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Center Cancer Center. Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Massimo Di NicolaImmunotherapy and Innovative Therapeutic Unit, Department of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Nicolas PenelDepartment of Medical Oncology, Centre Oscar Lambret and Lille University, Lille, France.
Ruth VeraDepartment of Medical Oncology, Complejo Hospitalario de Navarra and Navarra Institute for Health Research (IdiSNA), Pamplona, Spain.
Miguel F SanmamedDepartment of Oncology, University Clinic of Navarra and Health Research Institute of Navarra (IdiSNA), Pamplona, SpainPamplona, Spain.
Jean-Yves DouillardScientific and Medical Division, European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), Lugano, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During the last years, there has been a dramatic increase in the administrative and bureaucratic burden associated with clinical research, which has clearly had an impact on its overall efficiency and on the activity of clinical investigators and research teams. Indeed, the supervision of the adherence of clinical research to Good Clinical Practice (GCP) guidelines and legal regulations is of the utmost importance. Yet, while such regulations have remained largely unchanged during recent years, the number of administrative tasks and their complexity have grown markedly, as supported by the results of a survey performed among 940 clinical investigators that we report in this manuscript. Therefore, many investigators believe that it has become necessary to undertake a rigorous analysis of the causes and consequences of this issue, and to create a conduit to channel the advice from experienced investigators regarding clinical research procedures, in order to improve them. Based on these premises, ESMO has launched the ESMO Clinical Research Observatory (ECRO), a task force that will analyse different aspects of clinical research. ECRO will aim to provide the views of ESMO on clinical research procedures based on the feedback from clinical investigators, under complete adherence to the Declaration of Helsinki, the GCP guidelines and any other applicable legal regulations, while at the same time showing profound respect for all the stakeholders involved in clinical research. This manuscript provides the background and rationale for the creation of ECRO, its planned activity and an analysis of the current administrative burden in clinical research with recommendations to rationalise it. Indeed, we expect that this effort shall lead to a relevant improvement in the care of patients and in the development of clinical research.

Indexed as

Research DesignResearch PersonnelGuidelines as TopicHumansadministrative burdenbureaucracyclinical interferenceclinical researchpharmacovigilance

Identifiers

PMID32393574
PMCPMC7223268

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.