scholarly journals An analysis of certification processes for Good Clinical Practice and project management competencies

2021 ◽  
Vol 43 ◽  
pp. 179-205
Author(s):  
Marek Zawada ◽  
◽  
Dorota Gągała ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Project Management ◽  
Clinical Trial Data ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Good Clinical Practice ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Certification Process ◽  
Key Characteristics

Aim/purpose–The purpose of this paper is to clarify the certification process of the Good Clinical Practice (GCP) competencies based on a comparison with the project management (PM) certification process. This aim was accomplished by model development.Design/methodology/approach–The study was divided into three main phases: 1st phase –the identification of key characteristics of PM and GCP certification processes, 2nd phase –the development of certification models for PM and GCP, 3rd phase –the conclusions from in-depth interviews.Findings–As a result of the research, key characteristics of PM and GCP certification processes were identified, certification models for PM and GCP were developed. In addition, based on conclusions from in-depth interviews, solutions for organizing the way of confirming knowledge of GCP guidelines were proposed.Research implications/limitations–The proposed rules may be too complex and may exceed the needs and expectations of the clinical trial environment. The models focus on stakeholder relations, without the rules of certification granting procedures, to enable broader contextualization of the issues discussed in the paper. The analysis might be fragmented as it regards the sole certification process. The research refers to Poland only, hence it will be valuable to identify whether foreign authorities have the same attitude to the GCP competency certification model. It is recommended to increase the number of respondents’ interviews to obtain results of higher validity and reliability. Originality/value/contribution–The paper raises research topics at the crossroads of project management, clinical trials, and GCP, topics that have been underdeveloped so far. The results might be significant for all organizations involved in conducting clinical research projects. The findings contribute to the quality of clinical trials and provide public assurance that the rights, safety, and well-being of trial subjects are protected and the clinical trial data are credible.Keywords:project management, clinical trials, certification, Good Clinical Practice, GCP.JEL Classification:M10, O32, I11.

scholarly journals Good clinical practice: International quality standard for clinical trials

2003 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-38
Author(s):  
Sinisa Radulovic
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Performance Monitoring ◽  
Experimental Studies ◽  
Clinical Trial Data ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Good Clinical Practice ◽  
Quality Standard ◽  
Scientific Quality

A clinical trial is one of the most important examples of experimental studies. Clinical trials represent an indispensable tool for testing, in a rigorous scientific manner, the efficacy of new therapies. Good Clinical Practice is an international ethical and scientific quality standard for clinical trials, concerning the design, conduct, performance, monitoring auditing, recording, analysis and reporting. This is an assurance to the public that the rights, safety and well-being of trial subjects are protected, and that clinical trial data is credible. The above definitions are consistent with the principles that have their origin in the declaration of Helsinki. The objectives of Good Clinical Practice are to protect the rights of trial subjects, to enhance credibility of data and to improve the quality of science.

scholarly journals Evaluation of an enhanced training package to support clinical trials training in low and middle income countries (LMICs): experiences from the Born Too Soon Optimising Nutrition study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eleanor Jane Mitchell ◽  
Jalemba Aluvaala ◽  
Lucy Bradshaw ◽  
Jane P Daniels ◽  
Ashok Kumar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Informed Consent ◽  
Global Health ◽  
Good Clinical Practice ◽  
Research Experience ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Training Package

Abstract Background Training is essential before working on a clinical trial, yet there is limited evidence on effective training methods. In low and middle income countries (LMICs), training of research staff was considered the second highest priority in a global health methodological research priority setting exercise. Methods We explored whether an enhanced training package in a neonatal feasibility study in Kenya and India, utilising elements of the train-the-trainer approach, altered clinicians and researchers’ clinical trials knowledge. A lead “trainer” was identified at each site who attended a UK-based introductory course on clinical trials. A two-day in-country training session was conducted at each hospital. Sessions included the study protocol, governance, data collection and ICH-Good Clinical Practice (GCP). To assess effectiveness of the training package, participants completed questionnaires at the start and end of the study period, including demographics, prior research experience, protocol-specific questions, informed consent and ICH-GCP. Results Thirty participants attended in-country training sessions and completed baseline questionnaires. Around three quarters had previously worked on a research study, yet only half had previously received training. Nineteen participants completed questionnaires at the end of the study period. Questionnaire scores were higher at the end of the study period, though not significantly so. Few participants ‘passed’ the informed consent and ICH-Good Clinical Practice (GCP) modules, using the Global Health Network Training Centre pass mark of ≥ 80%. Participants who reported having prior research experience scored higher in questionnaires before the start of the study period. Conclusions An enhanced training package can improve knowledge of research methods and governance though only small improvements in mean scores between questionnaires completed before and at the end of the study period were seen and were not statistically significant. This is the first report evaluating a clinical trial training package in a neonatal trial in LMICs. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, research activity was paused and there was a significant time lapse between training and start of the study, which likely impacted upon the scores reported here. Given the burden of disease in LMICs, developing high-quality training materials which utilise a variety of approaches and build research capacity, is critical.

scholarly journals Good Clinical Practice (GCP) – an alternative, unarticulated narrative

2021 ◽  
pp. 01-04
Author(s):  
Samir Malhotra
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Research ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Scientific Community ◽  
Good Clinical Practice ◽  
Official Document ◽  
Market Expansion ◽  
New Drug Development

GCP has become the gold-standard for clinical research; initiated as a guideline pertaining to new drug development, it became a law in many countries, extending its scope to include all research. GCP is an excellent document that outlines the responsibilities of stakeholders involved in clinical research. Widely acclaimed, and deservedly so, it is considered as the “go-to” document whenever questions arise during the conduct of a clinical trial. This article presents another narrative, one that has not been articulated so far. Irrespective of whether we consider GCP as a law or a guideline, it is viewed as an “official” document, without the overt realisation that this was actually an initiative of the pharmaceutical industry, the “masters of mankind”. While the stress on documentation and monitoring in GCP was justified, its over-interpretation led to increased costs of clinical trials, with the result that smaller companies find it difficult to conduct the already expensive trials. GCP as an idea is now so entrenched within the scientific community that the real aims which led to its birth and that can be mined from the ICH website, like the need for market expansion, have remained largely unnoticed and undocumented, and are being expressed here.

scholarly journals Enhancing Clinical Research Professionals’ Training and Qualifications (ECRPTQ): Recommendations for Good Clinical Practice (GCP) training for investigators and study coordinators

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 8-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas P. Shanley ◽  
Nancy A. Calvin-Naylor ◽  
Ruthvick Divecha ◽  
Michelle M. Wartak ◽  
Karen Blackwell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Research ◽  
Behavioral Interventions ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Good Clinical Practice ◽  
Translational Science ◽  
Minimum Criteria ◽  
Research Professionals

IntroductionThe translation of discoveries to drugs, devices, and behavioral interventions requires well-prepared study teams. Execution of clinical trials remains suboptimal due to varied quality in design, execution, analysis, and reporting. A critical impediment is inconsistent, or even absent, competency-based training for clinical trial personnel.MethodsIn 2014, the National Center for Advancing Translational Science (NCATS) funded the project, Enhancing Clinical Research Professionals’ Training and Qualifications (ECRPTQ), aimed at addressing this deficit. The goal was to ensure all personnel are competent to execute clinical trials. A phased structure was utilized.ResultsThis paper focuses on training recommendations in Good Clinical Practice (GCP). Leveraging input from all Clinical and Translational Science Award hubs, the following was recommended to NCATS: all investigators and study coordinators executing a clinical trial should understand GCP principles and undergo training every 3 years, with the training method meeting the minimum criteria identified by the International Conference on Harmonisation GCP.ConclusionsWe anticipate that industry sponsors will acknowledge such training, eliminating redundant training requests. We proposed metrics to be tracked that required further study. A separate task force was composed to define recommendations for metrics to be reported to NCATS.

Clinical Trial Data Management Software: A Review of the Technical Features

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 160-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aynaz Nourani ◽  
Haleh Ayatollahi ◽  
Masoud Solaymani Dodaran
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Data Management ◽  
Clinical Data ◽  
Clinical Trial Data ◽  
Trial Data ◽  
Data Management System ◽  
Management Systems ◽  
Data Management Systems ◽  
Technical Features

Background:Data management is an important, complex and multidimensional process in clinical trials. The execution of this process is very difficult and expensive without the use of information technology. A clinical data management system is software that is vastly used for managing the data generated in clinical trials. The objective of this study was to review the technical features of clinical trial data management systems.Methods:Related articles were identified by searching databases, such as Web of Science, Scopus, Science Direct, ProQuest, Ovid and PubMed. All of the research papers related to clinical data management systems which were published between 2007 and 2017 (n=19) were included in the study.Results:Most of the clinical data management systems were web-based systems developed based on the needs of a specific clinical trial in the shortest possible time. The SQL Server and MySQL databases were used in the development of the systems. These systems did not fully support the process of clinical data management. In addition, most of the systems lacked flexibility and extensibility for system development.Conclusion:It seems that most of the systems used in the research centers were weak in terms of supporting the process of data management and managing clinical trial's workflow. Therefore, more attention should be paid to design a more complete, usable, and high quality data management system for clinical trials. More studies are suggested to identify the features of the successful systems used in clinical trials.

The Use of Digital Clinical Trial Methods in the Evaluation of Digital Therapeutics: A Scoping Review (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allison Hirsch ◽  
Mahip Grewal ◽  
Anthony James Martorell ◽  
Brian Michael Iacoviello
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Clinical Research ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Digital Technologies ◽  
Good Clinical Practice ◽  
The United States ◽  
Clinical Trial Research ◽  
Digital Methods ◽  
Clinical Trial Methods

BACKGROUND Digital Therapeutics (DTx) provide evidence based therapeutic health interventions that have been clinically validated to deliver therapeutic outcomes, such that the software is the treatment. Digital methodologies are increasingly adopted to conduct clinical trials due to advantages they provide including increases in efficiency and decreases in trial costs. Digital therapeutics are digital by design and can leverage the potential of digital and remote clinical trial methods. OBJECTIVE The principal purpose of this scoping review is to review the literature to determine whether digital technologies are being used in DTx clinical research, which type are being used and whether publications are noting any advantages to their use. As DTx development is an emerging field there are likely gaps in the knowledge base regarding DTx and clinical trials, and the purpose of this review is to illuminate those gaps. A secondary purpose is to consider questions which emerged during the review process including whether fully remote digital clinical research is appropriate for all health conditions and whether digital clinical trial methods are inline with the principles of Good Clinical Practice. METHODS 1,326 records were identified by searching research databases and 1,227 reviewed at the full-article level in order to determine if they were appropriate for inclusion. Confirmation of clinical trial status, use of digital clinical research methods and digital therapeutic status as well as inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied in order to determine relevant articles. Digital methods employed in DTx research were extracted from each article and these data were synthesized in order to determine which digital methods are currently used in clinical trial research. RESULTS After applying our criteria for scoping review inclusion, 11 articles were identified. All articles used at least one form of digital clinical research methodology enabling an element of remote research. The most commonly used digital methods are those related to recruitment, enrollment and the assessment of outcomes. A small number of articles reported using other methods such as online compensation (n = 3), or digital reminders for participants (n = 5). The majority of digital therapeutics clinical research using digital methods is conducted in the United States and increasing number of articles using digital methods are published each year. CONCLUSIONS Digital methods are used in clinical trial research evaluating DTx, though not frequently as evidenced by the low proportion of articles included in this review. Fully remote clinical trial research is not yet the standard, more frequently authors are using partially remote methods. Additionally, there is tremendous variability in the level of detail describing digital methods within the literature. As digital technologies continue to advance and the clinical research DTx literature matures, digital methods which facilitate remote research may be used more frequently.

scholarly journals Oc021—Clinical Trials Registry And Good Clinical Practice: In Indian Scenario

2013 ◽  
Vol 35 (8) ◽  
pp. e9
Author(s):  
A. Prakash ◽  
B. Medhi ◽  
S. Kaur ◽  
S. Kumari ◽  
P. Sarotra
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Good Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Trials Registry ◽  
Indian Scenario

scholarly journals Obstacles in conducting clinical trials in the Saudi Arabia

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 166
Author(s):  
Salem D. Al Suwaidan ◽  
Aseel S. Alsuwaidan
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Saudi Arabia ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Research ◽  
Strategic Plan ◽  
Good Clinical Practice ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Regulatory Authorities ◽  
Research Institution

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> Conducting clinical research in accordance with the standards of regulatory authorities and within the guidelines of the good clinical practice (GCP) is a matter of concern.  It has been noticed that some increment in the conduction of clinical trials outside USA and European countries in the last two decades. The main objective of this study is to identify the magnitude of some obstacles that affect the conduction of clinical trials in accordance with the GCP.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> Developing questionnaire in accordance with the criteria of the GCP would make assessment on how to buildup infrastructure including policy and procedures of the research institution. Recommendation of the study is to perform this questionnaire every other year to assess the progress and development of the research institution.</p><p><strong>Conclusions:</strong> To identify good clinical researchers, what sort of obstacle(s) regarding conducting clinical trials, and from these obstacles how to resolve it and build up infrastructure for the research institution and also to establish the strategic plan for the research institution.</p>

The brain metastasis journey: Experience from patient, caregiver, and physician surveys on diagnosis and treatment of brain metastases.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e14004-e14004
Author(s):  
Albert Eusik Kim ◽  
GI-Ming WANG ◽  
Kristin A Waite ◽  
Scott Elder ◽  
Avery Fine ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Brain Metastases ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Whole Brain Radiotherapy ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Brain Radiotherapy

e14004 Background: Brain metastases (BM) is one of the most feared complications of cancer due to substantial neurologic sequalae, neuro-cognitive morbidity and grim prognosis. In the past decade, targeted therapies and checkpoint inhibitors have resulted in meaningfully improved overall survival for a minority of these patients. Accordingly, there is a growing need to identify issues surrounding patient survivorship and to standardize physician practice patterns for these patients. To date, there has not been a well-conducted formal study to specifically explore these questions of survivorship and practice standardization for BM patients. Methods: Here, we present results from a cross-sectional survey in which we analyzed responses from 237 BM patients, 209 caregivers, and 239 physicians. Surveys contained questions about BM symptoms, discussion of BM diagnosis by the clinician, psychosocial concerns, available treatment options for BM, BM patient advocacy resources, and BM-specific clinical trials. Results: Our survey revealed compelling findings about current care of BM patients. There were discrepancies in the perceived discussion of the implications of the diagnosis of BM, from the patient/caregiver and physician perspective. Important topics, such as prognosis and worrisome symptoms, were felt to have been discussed more frequently by physicians than by patients or caregivers. In our physician survey, private practice physicians, compared to academic physicians, were significantly more likely to recommend whole brain radiotherapy (61.1 vs 39.7%; p = 0.009). Participation in a clinical trial was one of the least recommended treatment options. Many physicians (59.1% private; 71.9% academic) stated that BM patients in their care are denied participation in a clinical trial, specifically due to the presence of BM. The consensus among physicians, patients and caregivers was that the highest yield area for federal assistance is increased treatment and research funding for BM. Conclusions: Our hope is that these findings will serve as a basis for future quality improvement measures to enhance patient-physician communication and patient well-being, continuing medical education activities detailing latest advances in BM for oncologists, and lobbying efforts to the federal government in prioritizing BM research, clinical trials, and patient survivorship.

Trial design from a clinical perspective

ESC CardioMed ◽  
2018 ◽  
pp. 3067-3071
Author(s):  
John G. F. Cleland ◽  
Ian Ford
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Trial Design ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Practical Significance ◽  
Commercial Company ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
General Guidance

This chapter is written primarily from the perspective of investigators with limited resources designing clinical trials to assess the effects of interventions on patient well-being and outcomes with the hope that the results might influence clinical practice and guidelines. Other perspectives should be taken into account. The advice may be less applicable when resources are abundant (e.g. phase III trials sponsored by a large commercial company). Much research is funded by commercial companies hoping for a return on investment; they will design clinical trials to increase the chance of a statistically positive result. Many investigators will do the same although their motivation may differ. However, practising clinicians, patients, and health services want trials that help inform their daily clinical practice rather than merely achieving statistical significance. Large studies may be statistically positive but of dubious practical significance. This chapter gives some general guidance on selecting patients, comparators, endpoints, and study design.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document