Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37440894›Full record

ArticleThe journal of research administration2022

The University of Minnesota's Clinical Research Support Center Feasibility Review: An objective protocol assessment carving a pathway to study success.

Nicole Tosun, Ryan Lee, Francoise Crevel, Carrie McKenzie, Brian Odlaug, Melena D Bellin, Brenda Prich, Daniel Weisdorf

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of research administration, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Nicole TosunClinical Research Support Center | Clinical & Translational Science Institute, University of Minnesota, 505 Essex St SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455.
Ryan LeeClinical Research Support Center | Clinical & Translational Science Institute, University of Minnesota, 505 Essex St SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455.
Francoise CrevelClinical Research Support Center | Clinical & Translational Science Institute, University of Minnesota, 505 Essex St SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455.
Carrie McKenzieClinical Research Support Center | Clinical & Translational Science Institute, University of Minnesota, 505 Essex St SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455.
Brian OdlaugDepartment of Neurology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455.
Melena D BellinDepartment of Pediatrics | Clinical Research Support Center | Clinical & Translational Science Institute, University of Minnesota, 420 Delaware St SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455.
Brenda PrichClinical Research Support Center | Clinical & Translational Science Institute, University of Minnesota, 505 Essex St SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455.
Daniel WeisdorfDivision of Hematology, Oncology and Transplantation | Clinical Research Support Center | Clinical & Translational Science Institute, University of Minnesota, 420 Delaware St SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455.

Funding

University of Minnesota Clinical and Translational Science Institute (UMN CTSI)UL1TR000114 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI BLAZAR, BRUCE R · 2012 to 2015
$35.0M
University of Minnesota Clinical and Translational Science Institute (UMN CTSI)UL1TR002494 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI BLAZAR, BRUCE R, WEISDORF, DANIEL J · 2018 to 2022
$34.9M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000114NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002494
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To successfully and efficiently initiate clinical research studies, it is critical to develop a strong, feasible, and well-written study protocol early in the start-up phase. The University of Minnesota's Clinical Research Support Center designed and implemented a structured Feasibility Review process in 2018 that addresses common start-up challenges such as poor study design, inappropriate outcomes, and limited resources. This process has been shown to turn an unfeasible study into a well-designed protocol that is IRB-approved with few protocol-related stipulations and well prepared for execution. It has also educated study teams on how to write better quality and more robust protocols for subsequent studies. Once a draft protocol is available, the entire process takes just six working days and is free of charge to investigators, study teams, and departments. From 2018-2021, one hundred sixteen Feasibility Reviews (n=116) have been completed across eight schools or colleges. Mean satisfaction scores for study team members who responded were high (N=126, M=4.71 ± 0.5) on a 5-point Likert-type scale. Most respondents (96%) indicated that they planned to modify their protocol based on reviewer feedback. Open ended/qualitative feedback was highly positive with most responses centered around the helpfulness of feasibility review, the high level of expertise, and fast turnaround time. The Feasibility Review is a valuable and multifunctional program providing timely expert guidance to study teams to efficiently and successfully launch and execute clinical research studies. It can be easily replicated, adapted, and implemented at other institutions to increase the quality and efficacy of academic research.

Indexed as

clinical and translational sciencefeasibility reviewprotocol developmentstudy start-up

Identifiers

PMID37440894
PMCPMC10337011

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.