ArticleAcute medicine & surgery
Challenges hindering emergency physicians; involvement in multicenter collaborative studies in Japan: A nationwide survey analysis.
Article in Acute medicine & surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Challenges hindering emergency physicians; involvement in multicenter collaborative studies in Japan: A nationwide survey analysis.Acute medicine & surgeryArticle
- Profile and Data Quality of DataVerse Japan: A Multi-Institutional Clinical Data Platform for Emergency and Critical Care Research.Acute medicine & surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: Multicenter collaborative research accelerates patient recruitment and strengthens evidence. Nevertheless, the factors influencing emergency and critical care physicians' involvement in such research in Japan remain unclear. Methods: A nationwide web-based survey conducted in early 2023 targeted emergency physicians working a minimum of 3 days per week in Japan. The survey descriptively assessed their backgrounds, work and research environments, experiences, and perceived impediments and motivators for multicenter research. Results: Of the 387 respondents, 348 were included in the study, yielding a 5.1% response rate. Women comprised 11% of the participants; 33% worked in university hospitals, 65% served in both emergency departments and intensive care units, and 54% did shift work. Only 12% had designated research time during working hours, with a median of 1 hour per week (interquartile range 0-5 h), including time outside of work. While 73% had participated in multicenter research, 58% noted barriers to participation. The key obstacles were excessive data entry (72%), meeting time constraints (59%), ethical review at each facility (50%), and unique sample collection, such as bronchoalveolar lavage specimens or pathological tissues (51%). The major incentives were networking (70%), data sets reuse (65%), feedback on research results (63%), and recognition from academic societies (63%). Financial rewards were not highly prioritized (38%). Conclusions: While valuing clinical research, emergency physicians face barriers, especially data entry burden and limited research time. Networking and sharing research findings motivate them. These insights can guide strategies to enhance collaborative research in emergency and critical care in Japan.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.