[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The gap between research and practice is well documented. We address one of the underlying reasons for this gap: the assumption that effectiveness research naturally and logically follows from successful efficacy research. These 2 research traditions have evolved different methods and values; consequently, there are inherent differences between the characteristics of a successful efficacy intervention versus those of an effectiveness one. Moderating factors that limit robustness across settings, populations, and intervention staff need to be addressed in efficacy studies, as well as in effectiveness trials. Greater attention needs to be paid to documenting intervention reach, adoption, implementation, and maintenance. Recommendations are offered to help close the gap between efficacy and effectiveness research and to guide evaluation and possible adoption of new programs.
American Journal of Public Health 09/2003; 93(8):1261-7. DOI:10.2105/AJPH.93.8.1261 · 4.23 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The authors assessed the prevalence and associated economic impact of low-enrolling clinical studies at a single academic medical center.
The authors examined all clinical studies receiving institutional review board (IRB) review between FY2006 and FY2009 at Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU) for recruitment performance and analyzed them by type of IRB review (full-board, exempt, expedited), funding mechanism, and academic unit. A low-enrolling study included those with zero or one participant at the time of study termination. The authors calculated the costs associated with IRB review, financial setup, contract negotiation, and department study start-up activities and the total economic impact on OHSU of low-enrolling studies for FY2009.
A total of 837 clinical studies were terminated during the study period, 260 (31.1%) of which were low-enrolling. A greater proportion of low-enrolling studies were government funded than industry funded (P=.006). The authors found significant differences among the various academic units with respect to percentages of low-enrolling studies (from 10% to 67%). The uncompensated economic impact of low-enrolling studies was conservatively estimated to be nearly $1 million for FY2009.
A substantial proportion of clinical studies incurred high institutional and departmental expense but resulted in little scientific benefit. Although a certain percentage of low-enrolling studies can be expected in any research organization, the overall number of such studies must be managed to reduce the aggregate costs of conducting research and to maximize research opportunities. Effective, proactive interventions are needed to address the prevalence and impact of low enrollment.
Academic medicine: journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges 09/2011; 86(11):1360-6. DOI:10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182306440 · 3.47 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Clinical trials are essential to the evaluation of promising scientific discoveries, but they are becoming unsustainably burdensome, threatening to deprive patients and health-care providers of new therapies and new evidence to guide the use of existing treatments. Regulations are often blamed for impeding clinical research, but there are other elements of the clinical trials enterprise that also have the potential to add burdens, through either imposed requirements or incentives that do not favor clinical research (Figure 1).
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.