Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39702376›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2024

The Australian clinical trial landscape: Perceptions of rural, regional and remote health service capacity and capability.

Jenna Graffini, Karen Johnston, Alison Farrington, Steven M McPhail, Sarah Larkins

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
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

5 authors.

Jenna GraffiniCollege of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD, Australia. jenna.graffini@jcu.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8890-2759
Karen JohnstonCollege of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD, Australia.
Alison FarringtonAustralian Centre for Health Services Innovation and Centre for Healthcare Transformation, School of Public Health and Social Work, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Steven M McPhailAustralian Centre for Health Services Innovation and Centre for Healthcare Transformation, School of Public Health and Social Work, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Sarah LarkinsCollege of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccess to clinical trials is limited for rural, regional and remote Australians, adding to the current health inequity between rural and metropolitan populations. The Australasian Teletrial Model was developed to bring clinical trials "closer to home". In 2020, the Australian Teletrial Program was funded to expand and support the uptake of the model across six Australian states and territories. The aim of this study was to explore and describe the clinical trial landscape in Australia prior to the implementation of the Australian Teletrial Program with a particular focus on rural, regional and remote health services.

methodsThis qualitative study provides a descriptive exploration of the clinical trial landscape across rural, regional and remote Australia. Data were obtained from semi-structured interviews (n = 33) and one focus group (n = 5) involving clinical trial stakeholders between August 2022 and May 2023. Deductive then inductive thematic analysis used the broad topic areas of the interview schedule as a framework, as follows: education and training, workforce, equipment and services, clinical trial sites, participant recruitment and clinical trial approval process.

resultsThis study identified barriers that are generalizable to the Australian clinical trial landscape and those specific to the rural, regional and remote health service context. The main barriers to conducting clinical trials in rural, regional and remote areas were lack of investment and engagement on the part of health service executives, workforce limitations, inconsistent training, lack of physical infrastructure and competing clinical priorities. Despite these challenges, clinicians reported enthusiasm for conducting clinical trials, and opportunities were reported for these health services to partner with larger metropolitan/regional health services, regional universities and communities to support the growth of clinical trial capability and capacity.

conclusionsThe clinical trial landscape in Australian health services varies in terms of quality and availability of training, workforce capacity, executive support, site capability and approval processes. The Australian Teletrial Program has an immense opportunity to overcome some of the reported challenges by supporting capacity and capability building. Ultimately, however, sustainable reform to bring trials closer to home requires a collaborative approach that considers implementation strategies across all levels of the health service and government, alongside other initiatives.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicFocus GroupsHealth Services AccessibilityQualitative ResearchRural Health ServicesRural PopulationAustraliaHumansInterviews as TopicPatient SelectionClinical trialsHealth servicesRural, regional and remote healthTeletrials

Identifiers

PMID39702376
PMCPMC11657177

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.