RATIONALE, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES: Large-scale, multi-network clinical trials are seen as a means for efficient and effective utilization of resources with greater responsiveness to new discoveries. Formal structures instituted within the National Institutes of Health (NIH) HIV/AIDS Clinical Trials facilitate collaboration and coordination across networks and emphasize an integrated approach to HIV/AIDS vaccine, prevention and therapeutics clinical trials. This study examines the joint usage of clinical research sites as means of gaining efficiency, extending capacity, and adding scientific value to the networks. METHODS: A semi-structured questionnaire covering eight clinical management domains was administered to 74 (62% of sites) clinical site coordinators at single- and multi-network sites to identify challenges and efficiencies related to clinical trials management activities and coordination with multi-network units. RESULTS: Overall, respondents at multi-network sites did not report more challenges than single-network sites, but did report unique challenges to overcome including in the areas of study prioritization, community engagement, staff education and training, and policies and procedures. The majority of multi-network sites reported that such affiliations do allow for the consolidation and cost-sharing of research functions. Suggestions for increasing the efficiency or performance of multi-network sites included streamlining standards and requirements, consolidating protocol activation methods, using a single cross-network coordinating centre, and creating common budget and payment mechanisms. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this assessment provide important information to consider in the design and management of multi-network configurations for the NIH HIV/AIDS Clinical Trials Networks, as well as others contemplating and promoting the concept of multi-network settings.
RATIONALE, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES: Large-scale, multi-network clinical trials are seen as a means for efficient and effective utilization of resources with greater responsiveness to new discoveries. Formal structures instituted within the National Institutes of Health (NIH) HIV/AIDS Clinical Trials facilitate collaboration and coordination across networks and emphasize an integrated approach to HIV/AIDS vaccine, prevention and therapeutics clinical trials. This study examines the joint usage of clinical research sites as means of gaining efficiency, extending capacity, and adding scientific value to the networks. METHODS: A semi-structured questionnaire covering eight clinical management domains was administered to 74 (62% of sites) clinical site coordinators at single- and multi-network sites to identify challenges and efficiencies related to clinical trials management activities and coordination with multi-network units. RESULTS: Overall, respondents at multi-network sites did not report more challenges than single-network sites, but did report unique challenges to overcome including in the areas of study prioritization, community engagement, staff education and training, and policies and procedures. The majority of multi-network sites reported that such affiliations do allow for the consolidation and cost-sharing of research functions. Suggestions for increasing the efficiency or performance of multi-network sites included streamlining standards and requirements, consolidating protocol activation methods, using a single cross-network coordinating centre, and creating common budget and payment mechanisms. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this assessment provide important information to consider in the design and management of multi-network configurations for the NIH HIV/AIDS Clinical Trials Networks, as well as others contemplating and promoting the concept of multi-network settings.
Authors: Steven M Paul; Daniel S Mytelka; Christopher T Dunwiddie; Charles C Persinger; Bernard H Munos; Stacy R Lindborg; Aaron L Schacht Journal: Nat Rev Drug Discov Date: 2010-02-19 Impact factor: 84.694
Authors: Robert L Williams; Stephen B Johnson; Sarah M Greene; Eric B Larson; Lee A Green; Alan Morris; Dennis Confer; Gregory Reaman; Rosemary Madigan; James Kahn Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2008-09-22
Authors: Joseph S Ross; Marian Mocanu; Julianna F Lampropulos; Tony Tse; Harlan M Krumholz Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2013-05-13 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Merit Cudkowicz; Marianne K Chase; Christopher S Coffey; Dixie J Ecklund; Brenda J Thornell; Codrin Lungu; Katy Mahoney; Laurie Gutmann; Jeremy M Shefner; Kevin J Staley; Michael Bosch; Eric Foster; Jeffrey D Long; Emine O Bayman; James Torner; Jon Yankey; Richard Peters; Trevis Huff; Robin A Conwit; Shlomo Shinnar; Donna Patch; Basil T Darras; Audrey Ellis; Roger J Packer; Karen S Marder; Claudia A Chiriboga; Claire Henchcliffe; Joyce Ann Moran; Blagovest Nikolov; Stewart A Factor; Carole Seeley; Steven M Greenberg; Anthony A Amato; Sara DeGregorio; Tanya Simuni; Tina Ward; John T Kissel; Stephen J Kolb; Amy Bartlett; Joseph F Quinn; Kellie Keith; Steven R Levine; Nadege Gilles; Patricia K Coyle; Jessica Lamb; Gil I Wolfe; Annemarie Crumlish; Luis Mejico; Muhammad Maaz Iqbal; James D Bowen; Caryl Tongco; Louis B Nabors; Khurram Bashir; Melanie Benge; Craig M McDonald; Erik K Henricson; Björn Oskarsson; Bruce H Dobkin; Catherine Canamar; Tracy A Glauser; Daniel Woo; Angela Molloy; Peggy Clark; Timothy L Vollmer; Alexander J Stein; Richard J Barohn; Mazen M Dimachkie; Jean-Baptiste Le Pichon; Michael G Benatar; Julie Steele; Lawrence Wechsler; Paula R Clemens; Christine Amity; Robert G Holloway; Christine Annis; Mark P Goldberg; Mariam Andersen; Susan T Iannaccone; A Gordon Smith; J Robinson Singleton; Mariana Doudova; E Clarke Haley; Mark S Quigg; Stephanie Lowenhaupt; Beth A Malow; Karen Adkins; David B Clifford; Mengesha A Teshome; Noreen Connolly Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2020-06-01 Impact factor: 18.302