ArticleContemporary clinical trials communications2026
Blind spots: The hidden challenges of conducting multisite intervention research.
Article in Contemporary clinical trials communications, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
U.S. single-IRB (sIRB) policies require one central IRB to review federally funded multisite research. Although intended to support collaboration, few studies have explored the practical challenges of implementing sIRBs. Drawing on firsthand experience from a multisite project, we present challenges and solutions to inform researchers considering or required to use sIRBs. Challenges include identifying when sIRB review is needed, costs associated with sIRB review, insufficient communication pathways, and complex submission processes. Recommendations include consulting with the IRB early, proactively confirming reliance processes and needed updates, establishing expectations for clear communication across sites, increasing structural support to promote equitable participation, and standardizing local context review requirements to improve consistency and efficiency.
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.