| Title |
Managing clinical trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Trials, July 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1745-6215-11-78 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Barbara Farrell, Sara Kenyon, Haleema Shakur |
| Abstract |
Managing clinical trials, of whatever size and complexity, requires efficient trial management. Trials fail because tried and tested systems handed down through apprenticeships have not been documented, evaluated or published to guide new trialists starting out in this important field. For the past three decades, trialists have invented and reinvented the trial management wheel. We suggest that to improve the successful, timely delivery of important clinical trials for patient benefit, it is time to produce standard trial management guidelines and develop robust methods of evaluation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 39 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 14 | 36% |
| United States | 3 | 8% |
| Spain | 2 | 5% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| Zimbabwe | 1 | 3% |
| Australia | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 17 | 44% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 23 | 59% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 9 | 23% |
| Scientists | 6 | 15% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 329 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 5 | 2% |
| United States | 3 | <1% |
| Denmark | 3 | <1% |
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 2 | <1% |
| China | 2 | <1% |
| Singapore | 2 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 7 | 2% |
| Unknown | 301 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 65 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 59 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 31 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 23 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 23 | 7% |
| Other | 72 | 22% |
| Unknown | 56 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 107 | 33% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 26 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 20 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 19 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 16 | 5% |
| Other | 74 | 22% |
| Unknown | 67 | 20% |