Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37389795›Full record

ArticleTherapeutic innovation & regulatory science2023

Applying Systems Thinking to Inform Decentralized Clinical Trial Planning and Deployment.

Lidia Betcheva, Jennifer Y Kim, Feryal Erhun, Nektarios Oraiopoulos, Kenneth Getz

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC 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 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Adoption of Decentralization: Are Our Perceptions Holding Us Back?Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. 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

5 authors.

Lidia BetchevaJudge Business School, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 1AG, UK. lb702@jbs.cam.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-8165-5639
Jennifer Y KimTufts Center for the Study of Drug Development, Tufts University, Boston, MA, 02111, USA.
Feryal ErhunJudge Business School, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 1AG, UK.
Nektarios OraiopoulosJudge Business School, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 1AG, UK.
Kenneth GetzTufts Center for the Study of Drug Development, Tufts University, Boston, MA, 02111, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recently, there has been a growing interest in understanding how decentralized clinical trial (DCT) solutions can mitigate existing challenges in clinical development, particularly participant burden and access, and the collection, management, and quality of clinical data. This paper examines DCT deployments, emphasizing how they are integrated and how they may impact clinical trial oversight, management, and execution. We propose a conceptual framework that employs systems thinking to evaluate the impact on key stakeholders through a reiterative assessment of pain points. We conclude that decentralized solutions should be customized to meet patient needs and preferences and the unique requirements of each clinical trial. We discuss how DCT elements introduce new demands and pressures within the existing system and reflect on enablers that can overcome DCT implementation challenges. As stakeholders look for ways to make clinical research more relevant and accessible to a larger and more diverse patient population, further robust and granular research is needed to quantify the impact of DCTs empirically.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicSystems AnalysisHumansAdoption and implementation of DCTsDecentralized clinical trials (DCTs)Pain pointsStakeholder analysisSystems thinking

Identifiers

PMID37389795
PMCPMC10400692

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.