ArticleTherapeutic innovation & regulatory science2026
Training Needs Assessment and Capacity Building of Clinical Trial Assessors and Ethical Reviewers to Strengthen Regulatory Review in Tanzania.
Article in Therapeutic innovation & regulatory 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
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSub-Saharan Africa carries 25.0% of the global disease burden but hosts only 2.0% of clinical trials worldwide. A key measure to address this challenge is shortening review timelines and enhancing the capacity of protocol reviewers in regulatory authorities. This study, triggered by the Tanzania medicines and medical devices authority and stakeholders, aimed to assess the competency of assessors in reviewing clinical trial applications and to conduct an intervention involving didactic and hands-on training.
methodsA descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted from February 2021 to June 2021 using an online survey targeting 128 participants from medicines regulatory authorities, regional ethical committees, institutional review boards, and research institutions. A 70-hour (7 credit) course was developed and implemented in 30 clinical trial assessors.
resultsThe survey had a 70.3% response rate, with 58.9% male participants. Over half of the participants held a master's degree. The study revealed that 94.0% needed training in clinical assessment, 92.2% in quality assessment, and 92.6% in statistical assessment for clinical trial protocols. Following pre- and post-training evaluation, one sample t-test indicated a statistically significant difference in the mean scores, 18.96, CI (13.15-24.76), indicating an improvement in the knowledge of the participants.
conclusionThe study identified significant gaps in the competency of clinical trial applications assessors and ethical reviewers in Tanzania according to the African vaccine regulatory forum guidelines for review of clinical trial protocols. The targeted training improved the capacity of 30 assessors, yet further targeted and stratified capacity-building trainings are recommended to enhance regulatory capacity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42036537What 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.