ArticleBMJ open2024
Construction of a competency evaluation model for Clinical Research Coordinators in China: a study based on the Delphi method and questionnaire survey.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. 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.
- Developing and evaluating a multidimensional progress-based assessment standard for standing long jump performance in university physical education: a sequential mixed-methods study.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Competency-based compensation adjustment model: A new paradigm for clinical research coordinator merit advancement.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Quality of Drug Clinical Trials in China: A Mixed Methods Research.Journal of evidence-based medicine · 2025Article
- Preference of Chinese clinical researchers to participate in international clinical research training: a cross-sectional study.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Construction of competency model for civil aviation flight dispatchers with integrated approach combining grounded theory and structural equation modeling.Scientific reports · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAs the number of clinical trials in China continues to grow, the assessment of competency of Clinical Research Coordinators (CRCs), who play a crucial role in clinical trials, has become an important and challenging topic. This study aims to construct a competency model for CRCs tailored to the Chinese context, in order to promote the standardisation and regulated development of the CRC industry. STUDY DESIGN AND
settingThis study was conducted in China, engaging CRCs as the primary subjects. A competency evaluation model for CRCs was constructed through literature review, semi-structured interviews, Delphi expert consultation and the analytic hierarchy process. A questionnaire survey was distributed to a broad sample of CRCs across China to evaluate the model's reliability and validity.
resultsThe final model encompasses 4 core competency dimensions and 37 indicators, tailored to assess the competencies of CRCs in China. The questionnaire yielded an effective response rate of 81.83%, with high internal consistency(Cronbach's α>0.7). Factor analysis confirmed the model's structure, indicating good reliability and validity.
conclusionThis study represents a pioneering effort in constructing a competency model specifically designed for Chinese CRCs, complemented by a robust and valid assessment scale. The findings bear significant implications for the recruitment, training, development and management of CRCs.
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.