ArticleTrials2023
Factors influencing the time to ethics and governance approvals for clinical trials: a retrospective cross-sectional survey.
Article in Trials, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- From Insights to Action: Enhancing Clinical Research at The Ottawa Hospital through a Mixed-Methods Improvement Project.Healthcare management forum · 2026Article
- TrialR: critical enablers and the need for reusable Rare Disease Clinical Trial infrastructure in Western Australia.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2026Article
- Approval delays in multi-country COVID-19 trials: the case of COPCOV and the risk of therapeutic inertia.Trials · 2025Article
- Operational determinants of recruitment and biospecimen collection in translational observational studies: a multi-site comparative analysis.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Addressing Challenges to Enhance Clinical Research in Portugal: Insights from the OncoT3 Expert Group Delphi Study.Cureus · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe findings from multi-centre trials are central to the practice of evidence-based medicine, enabling the development and implementation of new treatments. The time it takes to commence clinical trials at sites can be long, and ethics and governance approvals are key steps on the pathway to site activation. The goal of this study was to explore factors influencing the times to ethics approval, governance approval and site activation for multi-centre clinical trials.
methodsThis paper assessed the associations of trial characteristics (disease area and trial phase), site characteristics (government or private ownership, country) and characteristics of the ethics and governance processes (scope guidelines, mutual acceptance requirements and triage of projects by risk) with times to approvals and activation. Median times were compared between site initiations that were and were not exposed to each characteristic using non-parametric tests in univariable and multivariable regressions.
resultsThere were data from 150 site activations done across 91 sites, 16 trials and 5 countries from November 2013 to November 2021. The overall median time to activation was 234 days (range 74 to 657), with ethics approval taking a median of 48 days (0 to 369) and governance approval a median of 34 days (0 to 489). Both the univariable and multivariable analyses identified associations of disease area, particularly oncology (p univariable = 0.012, p multivariable = 0.044), use of scope guidelines (p < 0.001, p = 0.020) and use of a triage process (p < 0.001, 0.043) with shorter median times for governance approval. These characteristics (all p < 0.001) plus early trial phase (p = 0.028) were also predictive of shorter median times for ethics approval in univariable analyses, but none remained predictive in multivariable models (all p > 0.054). The only factors associated with reduced overall time to site activation in both univariable and multivariable analyses were the early trial phase (p < 0.001, p = 0.013) and mutual acceptance of ethics approvals (p = 0.031, p = 0.030).
interpretationTimes to ethics and governance approvals were only one third of total trial start-up time. Factors influencing times to approval and activation were somewhat inconsistent across analyses, but it seems likely that the introduction of selected governance and ethics processes can reduce approval times.
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.