Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37313387›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2023

Leveraging retooled clinical research infrastructure for Clinical Research Management System implementation at a large Academic Medical Center.

Catherine G Mullen, Jessica Y Houlihan, Marissa Stroo, Christine E Deeter, Stephanie A Freel, Angela M Padget, Denise C Snyder

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Defining methods to improve eSource site start-up practices.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2024
    Article
  3. Clinical Research Informatics: a Decade-in-Review.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2024
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Scientia pro bono humani generis: Science for the benefit of humanity.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2024
    Article
  6. Review
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.

Catherine G MullenDuke Office of Clinical Research, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5857-7492
Jessica Y HoulihanDuke Office of Clinical Research, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Marissa StrooDuke Office of Clinical Research, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2796-6457
Christine E DeeterDuke Office of Clinical Research, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Stephanie A FreelDuke Office of Clinical Research, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8525-3271
Angela M PadgetDuke Office of Clinical Research, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Denise C SnyderDuke Office of Clinical Research, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1160-7433

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quality clinical research is essential for health care progress and is the mission of academic health centers. Yet ensuring quality depends on an institution's ability to measure, control, and respond to metrics of trial performance. Uninformed clinical research provides little benefit to health care, drains institutional resources, and may waste participants' time and commitment. Opportunities for ensuring high-quality research are multifactorial, including training, evaluation, and retention of research workforces; operational efficiencies; and standardizing policies and procedures. Duke University School of Medicine has committed to improving the quality and informativeness of our clinical research enterprise through investments in infrastructure with significant focus on optimizing research management system integration as a foundational element for quality management. To address prior technology limitations, Duke has optimized Advarra's OnCore for this purpose by seamlessly integrating with the IRB system, electronic health record, and general ledger. Our goal was to create a standardized clinical research experience to manage research from inception to closeout. Key drivers of implementation include transparency of research process data and generating metrics aligned with institutional goals. Since implementation, Duke has leveraged OnCore data to measure, track, and report metrics resulting in improvements in clinical research conduct and quality.

Indexed as

academic medical centerclinical research financeclinical research operationsclinical trial efficiencyClinical trial management system

Identifiers

PMID37313387
PMCPMC10260330

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.