Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36930415›Full record

ArticleTherapeutic innovation & regulatory science2023

Assessment of the Relationship Between Protocol Adherence, Study Complexity and Personnel in Surgical Clinical Trials.

O Akpoviroro, M Castagne-Charlotin, N P Joyce, M A Malikova

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

O AkpoviroroDepartment of Surgery, Chobanian and Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston University, Boston Medical Center, 85 East Concord Street, Boston, MA, 02118, USA.
M Castagne-CharlotinDepartment of Surgery, Chobanian and Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston University, Boston Medical Center, 85 East Concord Street, Boston, MA, 02118, USA.
N P JoyceDepartment of Surgery, Chobanian and Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston University, Boston Medical Center, 85 East Concord Street, Boston, MA, 02118, USA.
M A MalikovaDepartment of Surgery, Chobanian and Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston University, Boston Medical Center, 85 East Concord Street, Boston, MA, 02118, USA. mmalikov@bu.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-1370-187X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn order to improve quality and efficiency of surgical trials, we assessed protocols complexity and examined whether it influenced the conduct, as measured by the number and types of deviations that occurred during the execution phase. Knowledge of these facts and performance of research team would allow to effectively mitigate the occurrence of deviations.

methodsThirty-five research protocols were rated according to a previously established complexity scoring model. Statistical analyses were performed to examine associations between protocol complexity, number of protocol/informed consent amendments vs. number/types of protocol deviations; as well as correlations with phase of the study, type of investigational product, personnel changes/experience level were assessed.

resultsAssessment of complexity score in Pearson's correlation test with the number of protocol deviations showed weak correlation, suggesting that other factors can influence protocol adherence. There was no correlation observed between number of deviations and type of study by investigational product category. In examining association between protocol deviations and number of subjects enrolled a trend was observed towards increased number of deviations once more subjects have entered the study. The higher number of protocol deviations was associated with increased number of protocol amendments (p = 0.0396), and there was no statistical significance observed between number of deviations and informed consent amendments (p = 0.5083). There was a moderate correlation detected between increased number of protocol deviations and total number of investigators on the study.

conclusionProtocol adherence can be improved with effective training and retention of research coordinators, investigators and frequent internal auditing to address discrepancies and effectively implement corrective actions. Upfront training of research personnel, with subsequent monitoring of performance metrics throughout the execution phase can reduce the total number of protocol deviations, ensure data integrity and improve quality of research conducted. Engagement of all stakeholders upfront, including clinical site personnel, can help develop well-designed clinical trial protocol, avoid time consuming and costly protocol and informed consent amendments at execution phase and ensure higher quality of research conducted, while allowing to meet objectives of the trial in a more efficient manner.

Indexed as

Informed ConsentResearch DesignHumansPandemicsResearch PersonnelDeviations managementProtocol adherenceProtocol complexityResearch personnel trainingRisk and change managementStudy protocol amendments

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.