Trial reportContemporary clinical trials2026
A study within a trial evaluating supplemental, reinforced risk-based training to reduce implementation barriers in a pediatric multicenter randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Contemporary clinical trials, 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHigh-quality conduct of clinical trials depends on strict adherence to both regulatory protocols and trial-specific procedures to ensure data integrity and participant safety. Standard methods utilized to train research staff have limitations, including lack of specificity and declining impact over time. We developed a Supplemental, Reinforced, Risk-Based Training (SRRBT) program, designed to target study-specific challenges and provide ongoing reinforcement. Our objective was to evaluate whether SRRBT improves protocol adherence.
methodsSRRBT was executed as a cluster-randomized, educational implementation study embedded in a multicenter clinical trial. We compared standard training with and without the addition of SRRBT across 23 clinical sites. SRRBT consisted of five interactive electronic vignettes focusing on trial-specific competencies. The primary outcome was the proportion of eligible participants approached for study participation. Secondary outcomes included consent and enrollment rates, protocol deviations, and completeness of study documentation.
resultsApproach rates immediately following training trended higher at SRRBT sites compared to those receiving standard training alone (OR = 3.98, 95% CI [0.87, 18.17], p = 0.074); however, this difference was not statistically significant and attenuated over time, with odds ratios of 2.24 (95% CI [0.78, 6.49], p = 0.14) at six months and 1.38 (95% CI [0.53, 3.59], p = 0.51) at 12 months post-training.
conclusionsSRRBT shows potential in enhancing early site-level protocol adherence but may require ongoing reinforcement to sustain benefits over time. This study highlights the need for continuous, adaptive training approaches in complex clinical trials to maintain high standards of protocol adherence.
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.