ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2026
Bridging sponsor-site operations through reciprocal on-site training of CRAs and CRCs: Impact on workflow knowledge and behavior among trial staff.
Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Opportunities for face-to-face interaction between sponsor-side clinical research associates (CRAs) and site-side clinical research coordinators (CRCs) have decreased with remote and risk-based monitoring, potentially impeding communication and mutual understanding - key determinants of team functioning. Accordingly, we implemented a reciprocal on-site training to enhance CRA-CRC mutual understanding and evaluated its impact. Methods: Seventeen sponsor staff, including 11 CRAs, joined an 8-hour hospital tour with CRC-guided process simulations and discussion; conversely, 14 hospital staff, including 11 CRCs, attended a 4-hour sponsor-office visit with system demonstrations and discussion. Self-assessed understanding of counterpart workflows and impressions of the counterpart group were rated pre- and post-training on 5-point Likert scales. Free-text feedback underwent text-mining analysis. Behavioral change was surveyed 6 months later. Results: CRAs improved on all 9 understanding items (e.g. "flow of daily medical practice:" median score 2.0 vs. 4.0, pre- and post-training, respectively, Conclusions: A brief, reciprocal, on-site training improved CRA-CRC mutual understanding and perceptions, with sustained self-reported behavioral changes in work practices. From a team science perspective, such practical training may strengthen sponsor-site communication and collaboration.
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.