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

Abstract

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

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Glass H, Beaudry D. The demographic, practice, and prescribing characteristics of US clinical investigators. Drug Inf J. 2007;41:641–647

    Article  Google 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):3–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    TTC website, http://www.ttc-llc.com/Surveys/Profiles_of_Clinical_lnvs_Questionnaire.pdf.

  9. 9.

    TTC website. http://www.ttc-llc.com/Surveys/Prufiles_of_Clinical_Invs_Results.pdf.

  10. 10.

    US Food and Drug Administration. Database, Bioresearch Monitoring Information System File. Available at: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/bmis/index.cfm.

  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Harold E. Gloss PhD.

Additional information

The Drug Information Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) to provide continuing medical education for physicians.

The Drug Information Association designates this educational activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s)™. Physicians should only claim credit commensurate with the extern of their participation in the activity. The Drug Information Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education as a provider of continuing pharmacy education. This program is designated for a maximum of 1 canted dour or .1 continuing education units (CEUs). 286-000-08-041-H04-P

If you would like to receive n statement of credit, you must review the article, and complete the posttest and evaluation included on the DIA website. Participants must receive a passing score of 80% or better an the posttest in order to receive a statement of credit. To access the posttest and evaluation, please visit the DIA website at www.diahome.org, select Educational Offerings, and then idea Continuing Education from the drop-down menu, and the My Transcript link. This will take you to the My Transcript page, where you will be prompted to sign in using your DIA user-name and password. Once signed in, you may select The Importance of Medical Innovation in an Investigators Decision to Take Part in Clinical Trials. You will be prompted to complete the posttest and evaluation. Upon successful completion of the posttest, you will be able to download your statement of credit. If you are not a DIA customer, please contact the DM office at mytran script@diohome.org for a registration form. There is no fee to receive your statement of credit.

Disclosure

It is Drug Information Association policy that alt faculty participating in continuing education activities must disclose to the program audience (1) any real or apparent conflicts) of interest related to the content of their presentation and (2) discussion of unlabeled or unapproved uses of drugs or medical devices. Specific areas to be considered in this disclosure include the following; grants/research support, consultancy relationships, speakers’ bureau participation, significant equity (stock) positions, and sources of honoraria.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gloss, H.E. The Importance of Medical Innovation in an Investigator’s Decision to Take Part in Clinical Trials. Ther Innov Regul Sci 42, 537–543 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1177/009286150804200602

Download citation

Key Words

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