ArticleContemporary clinical trials communications2025
"Common sense is hard work" but benefits from persistent collaboration: Lessons learnt from the development of The Collaborative Network for European Clinical Trials for Children (c4c) to support the conduct of paediatric clinical trials of medicines.
Article in Contemporary clinical trials communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The Collaborative Network for European Clinical Trials for Children (c4c) is a public private partnership with a developed infrastructure across European sites to support the design and conduct of multi-national academic and industry paediatric clinical trials. This paper aims to review the learning points identified during co-development of c4c processes by academic and industry partners. Methods: Study metrics were recorded. Learning points were captured during network development, categorized and included in a thematic analysis from which lessons learnt were identified. Results: 12 trials were supported by sites coordinated at national level and integrated at European level. A total of 9 CDA cycles were completed, resulting in 436 site CDAs signed in a median of 8.11 days. Lessons learnt included the importance of: relationship building by early engagement with partners; reducing misunderstanding by clear communication; flexibility, adaptability and experiential learning which are required for service improvement. Practical actions that infrastructure developers and users can take include operational planning with a view to fostering collaborations across stakeholders, sharing information about different approaches to clinical operations, and raising awareness of the need for explicit work on collaboration, communication, and planning. Traditionally, these activities are repeated for each trial. The use of a persistent network allows the benefits of collaboration to be recycled. Discussion: Building a successful framework for collaboration allows dedication and determination to carry over from one study to another. The initial investment of time to share assumptions and "state the obvious" by each user will support future trials.
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.