Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34729443›Full record

ArticleContemporary clinical trials communications2021

Strategy management in collaborative clinical research partnerships.

Jonathan Kagan, Jerome Lassa, Judith Zuckerman, Ellen Cull, David Boan, Julia Lysander, Wissedi Njoh, Kumblytee Johnson, Ratna Sardana, Kaytee Stern and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Contemporary clinical trials communications, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Jonathan KaganNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, US Department of Health and Human Services, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD, USA.
Jerome LassaFrederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, 5707 Industry Lane, Frederick, MD, USA.
Judith ZuckermanNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, US Department of Health and Human Services, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD, USA.
Ellen CullFrederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, 5707 Industry Lane, Frederick, MD, USA.
David BoanFrederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, 5707 Industry Lane, Frederick, MD, USA.
Julia LysanderPREVAIL/FHI Clinical, JFK Medical Center, 21st Street, Sinkor, Monrovia, Liberia.
Wissedi NjohPartnership for Research on Vaccines and Infectious Diseases in Liberia (PREVAIL), 21st Street, Monrovia, Liberia.
Kumblytee JohnsonPREVAIL/FHI Clinical, JFK Medical Center, 21st Street, Sinkor, Monrovia, Liberia.
Ratna SardanaNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, US Department of Health and Human Services, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD, USA.
Kaytee SternClinical Monitoring Research Program Directorate, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, 5707 Industry Lane, Frederick, MD, USA.
Beth GraceGrace Consulting Services, LLC, 3508 Woodvalley Dr., Pikesville, MD, USA.
Laura McNayNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, US Department of Health and Human Services, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD, USA.
Jemee TegliPREVAIL/FHI Clinical, JFK Medical Center, 21st Street, Sinkor, Monrovia, Liberia.
Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research · USNational Institutes of Health · USGrace (United States) · USLiberian Institute for Biomedical Research · LR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeToday's clinical trial partnerships frequently join multi-disciplinary investigators and stakeholders, from different countries and cultures, to conduct research with a broad array of goals. This diversity, while a strength, can also foster divergent views about priorities and what constitutes success, thereby posing challenges for management, operations, and evaluation. As a sponsor and partner in such collaborations, we seek to assist and support their development and implementation of sound research strategies, to optimize their efficiency, sustainability, and public health impact. This report describes our efforts using an adaptation of the well-established Kaplan-Norton strategy management paradigm, in our clinical trials setting. We share findings from our first test of the utility and acceptance of this approach for evaluating and managing research strategies in a collaborative clinical research partnership.

resultsFindings from pilot studies and our first implementation in an ongoing clinical research partnership in Liberia, provide initial support for our hypothesis that an adapted version of the Kaplan-Norton strategy management model can have use in this setting. With leadership from within the partnership, analysis artifacts were gathered, and assessments made using standardized tools. Practical feasibility, resonance of the findings with partners, and convergence with other empirical assessments lend initial support for the view that this approach holds promise for obtaining meaningful, useable results for assessing and improving clinical research management. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Engaged leadership, thoughtful timing to align with partnership planning cycles, support for the process, and an eye towards the collaboration's long-term goals appear important for developing model understanding and practice. Skepticism about evaluations, and unease at exposing weaknesses, may hinder the effort. Acceptance of findings and associated opportunities for improvement by group leadership, support a growing sense of validity. Next steps aim to test the approach in other partnerships, streamline the methodology for greater ease of use, and seek possible correlations of strategy management assessments with performance evaluation. There is hardly a better example than the COVID-19 pandemic, to spotlight the need for efficient and effective clinical research partnerships to address global health challenges. While heartened by the collaborative spirit driving the effort so far, we cannot let our enthusiasm lull us into thinking that nobility of purpose or an abundance of good will is sufficient. Careful monitoring and adjustment of clinical research strategy in response to changes (e.g., demographics, pathogen evolution, research acceptance, political and cultural environments) are vital to making the needed adjustments that can guide these programs toward successful outcomes. We hope that our work can raise awareness about the importance, relevance, and feasibility of sound strategy management in clinical research partnerships, especially during this time when there is so much at stake.

Indexed as

Clinical research partnershipsStrategy management

Identifiers

PMID34729443
PMCPMC8543383
OpenAlexW3195842702

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.