ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2025
Development of a job satisfaction measure for clinical research professionals: A mixed methods approach.
Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Developing the future clinical research workforce: An immersive high school clinical research summer camp.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Clinical research professionals (CRPs) are essential members of research teams serving in multiple job roles. However, recent turnover rates have reached crisis proportions, negatively impacting clinical trial metrics. Gaining an understanding of job satisfaction factors among CRPs working at academic medical centers (AMCs) can provide insights into retention efforts. Materials/Methods: A survey instrument was developed to measure key factors related to CRP job satisfaction and retention. The survey included 47 rating items in addition to demographic questions. An open-text question solicited respondents to provide their top three factors for job satisfaction. The survey was distributed through listservs of three large AMCs. Here, we present a factor analysis of the instrument and quantitative and qualitative results of the subsequent survey. Results: A total of 484 CRPs responded to the survey. A principal components analysis with Varimax rotation was performed on the 47 rating items. The analysis resulted in seven key factors and the survey instrument was reduced to 25 rating items. Self-efficacy and pride in work were top ranked in the quantitative results; work complexity and stress and salary and benefits were top ranked in the qualitative findings. Opportunities for education and professional development were also themes in the qualitative data. Discussion: This study addresses the need for a tool to measure job satisfaction of CRPs. This tool may be useful for additional validation studies and research to measure the effectiveness of improvement initiatives to address CRP job satisfaction and retention.
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.