Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34076698›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2021

Practices and Attitudes of Swiss Stakeholders Regarding Investigator-Initiated Clinical Trial Funding Acquisition and Cost Management.

Stuart McLennan, Alexandra Griessbach, Matthias Briel, Making Randomized Trials Affordable (MARTA) Group

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

4 authors.

Stuart McLennanDepartment of Clinical Research, Basel Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Basel and University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Alexandra GriessbachDepartment of Clinical Research, Basel Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Basel and University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Matthias BrielDepartment of Clinical Research, Basel Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Basel and University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Making Randomized Trials Affordable (MARTA) Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are an essential method of evaluating health care interventions and a cornerstone for evidence-based health care. However, RCTs have become increasingly complex and costly, which is particularly challenging for independent investigator-initiated clinical trials (IICTs). IICTs have an essential role in clinical research, and it is important that efforts are made to ensure IICTs are adequately funded and are conducted cost-effectively. Objective: To examine the practices and attitudes of Swiss stakeholders regarding IICT funding acquisition and cost management. Design, Setting, and Participants: For this qualitative study, interviews were conducted in Switzerland between February and August 2020. The purposive sample comprised 48 stakeholders from 4 different groups: primary investigators (n = 27), funders and sponsors (n = 9), clinical trial support organizations (n = 6), and ethics committee members (n = 6). Main Outcomes and Measures: Practices and attitudes of stakeholders regarding IICT funding acquisition and cost management were assessed using individual semistructured qualitative interviews. Interviews were analyzed using conventional content analysis. Results: After interviews with 48 IICT stakeholders (75% male presenting), these participants identified a systemic problem of IICTs being underfunded, which can lead to compromises being made regarding the quality and conduct of IICTs. Participants identified 2 overarching and interconnected groups of reasons why IICTs in Switzerland are regularly underfunded. First, it was reported that IICT budget estimations are often inaccurate because of poor planning and preparation, unforeseeable events, investigators intentionally underestimating budgets, and limited budget assessment and oversight. Second, with the exception of a specific IICT funding program by the Swiss National Science Foundation, it was reported that limited funding sources and unrealistic expectation of funders led to underlying challenges in getting IICTs fully funded. A number of measures that could help reduce the underfunding of IICTs were identified, including improving the support of investigators and IICTs, strengthening networking and guidance, harmonizing and simplifying bureaucracy, and increasing public funding of IICTs. Conclusions and Relevance: This study highlights the inadequate expertise of Swiss stakeholders to correctly, systematically, and reproducibly calculate RCT budgets and the need for transparency on trial costs as well as training in budgeting practices. Limited financial resources for academic clinical research and issues regarding the professional planning and conduct of IICTs are persistent issues that many other countries also face.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelStakeholder ParticipationAdultBiomedical ResearchClinical Trials as TopicFemaleHumansMaleOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CareResearch PersonnelSwitzerland

Identifiers

PMID34076698
PMCPMC8173375

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.