The Importance of Medical Innovation in an Investigator’s Decision to Take Part in Clinical Trials

  • Harold E. GlossEmail author
Clinical Trials


The study draws upon a mail survey of 762 US investigators. Investigators provide a number of reasons for their participation in clinical trials, but this study underscores medical innovation as the most important stimulus. Among other reasons for participating in clinical trials, the prospect of additional financial remuneration plays an important role, especially for office-based investigators. Clinical investigators may be tempted to provide socially valued responses, such as those relating to medical innovation, over more mundane considerations such as finances, as the reason for their taking part in clinical trials. Still, medical innovation figures prominently as a reason why investigators of all types participate in phase 3 clinical trials. This is important in understanding how to recruit experienced investigators, as well as physicians who may be potentially new clinical investigators.

Learning Objectives

Upon completion of this activity, participants should be able to:
  • Identify how to recruit experienced investigators, as well as physicians who may be potentially new clinical investigators.

Target Audience

This CME activity is designed for all involved in the design/implementation and analysis of clinical trials

Key Words

Principal investigator Phase 3 clinical trial Medical innovation Financial considerations Study sponsor and conduct 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Class H, Poli L. Connecting the dots. Pharm Exec. 2007;(1):56–58.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Glass H, DiFrancesco J. Understanding site performance differences in multinational phase III clinical trials. Int J Pharm Med. 2007;21(4): 279–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Glass H, Beaudry D. The demographic, practice, and prescribing characteristics of US clinical investigators. Drug Inf J. 2007;41:641–647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Getz K. Mapping the clinical investigator landscape. Presented at the 43rd annual D1A meeting; Atlanta, GA, June 18.2007.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Glass H, Kane R. Why investigators take part in clinical trials. Appl Clin Trials. 2000;9(6):46–54.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Glass H. The marketplace for clinical grants. Monitor. 2005;19(4):69–74.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Glass H. Do clinical grant payment practices in phase 3 clinical trials influence subsequent clinical investigator prescribing behavior? Dis Manage. 2004;7(1):3–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
  9. 9.
  10. 10.
    US Food and Drug Administration. Database, Bioresearch Monitoring Information System File. Available at:
  11. 11.
    Fabrigar LR, Wegener DT, MacCallum RC, Strahan EJ. Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods. 1999;(4):272–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Drug Information Association, Inc 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of the Sciences in Philadelphia and Managing Director, TTC, llcPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations