ArticleFrontiers in medicine2024
The competency index for clinical research professionals: a potential tool for competency-based clinical research academic program evaluation.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of real-world evidence research competencies in federated research networks: a maternal health fellowship program evaluation.JAMIA open · 2026Article
- Development and Exploratory Validation of the Clinical Research Nursing Competencies-Self-Efficacy Scale.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Development of a capability framework for Allied Health research careers in health services.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Assessment of competencies of clinical research professionals and proposals to improve clinical research in Portugal.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Accreditation of graduate academic programs in clinical research requires demonstration of program achievement of Joint Task Force for Clinical Trial Competence-based standards. Evaluation of graduate programs include enrollment, student grades, skills-based outcomes, and completion rates, in addition to other measures. Standardized measures of competence would be useful. Methods: We used the Competency Index for Clinical Research Professionals (CICRP), in a separate-sample pretest-posttest study to measure self-confidence or self-efficacy in clinical research competency comparing cohorts of students entering and completing a master's degree program in clinical research across three semesters (summer 2021 - spring 2022). CICRP is a 20-item Likert scale questionnaire (0 = Not at all confident; 10 = extremely confident). Results: The study sample of 110 students (54 in the entry course, 56 in the exit course) showed overall 80.9% entered the program with only a baccalaureate degree and 55.5% had no prior experience in managing clinical trial research. Cronbach alpha for the instrument showed a high level of content validity (range 0.93-0.98). Median CICRP item rating range at entry was [1, 6] and at exit [7, 10]. Mean CICRP total score (sum of 20 items) at entry was 72.7 (SD 41.9) vs. 167.0 (SD 21.1) at exit ( Conclusion: This is the first use of the CICRP for academic program evaluation. The CICRP may be a useful tool for competency-based academic program evaluation, in addition to other measures of program excellence.
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.