ABSTRACT
AIM: To investigate and analyze the current situation and needs of clinical research nurses in China, in order to provide scientific basis for constructing a training system for research nurses, promoting standardized training, and achieving standardized management for them. METHODS:A self-made questionnaire was used to investigate 102 research nurses from nearly 70 well-known clinical trial institutions in China. The contents of the questionnaire mainly included the general information, professional experience and work content of the research nurses, the sense of accomplishment and training needs of clinical trial work. RESULTS: Among the 102 research nurses surveyed, 92.15% have a bachelor's degree or above; 53.92% of those have intermediate or higher professional titles; 74.51% of them are part-time research nurse. Among professional experiences, 19.61% have more than 10 years of clinical trial experience; 47.06%, 40.20%, and 21.17% of surveyed research nurses were authorized to participate in clinical trial drug management, sample management, and quality control; 70.59% of research nurses have a high sense of achievement in their daily work. In terms of education and training needs, clinical trial related laws and regulations, standardized training for clinical trial protocol implementation, and good clinical practice (GCP) are the three most important aspects. CONCLUSION: Clinical research nurses in China have a relatively high level of education and nursing experience, but there is still a large gap in the amount of professional full-time clinical research nurses in China. Due to the rapid development of innovative drugs and devices, as well as the urgent need to improve the clinical research system, it is necessary to establish a training, assessment, and evaluation system for research nurses that is in line with China's national conditions in order to improve the professional level of research nurses, and improve the quantity and quality of clinical trial research on innovative drugs and devices in China.
ABSTRACT
Objective:To propose suggestions on the prevention and treatment measures of drug clinical trial research-related injury from the research center perspective, and improve the protection of the rights of human subjects.Methods:Analyze three representative cases of drug clinical trial research-related injury compensation in a hospital, and put forward suggestions for the project management of the research center.Results:By reviewing informed consent forms and clinical trial liability insurance, actively participating in research-related injury treatment and implementation supervision, paying attention to safety information and risk monitoring, ethics committees, clinical trial institutions and investigators can play more proactive roles in protecting the rights and interests of human subjects.Conclusions:The research center could better control the risks of clinical trials and improve the protection of human subjects by strengthening the prevention and treatment measures for clinical trial research-related injury.
ABSTRACT
Ensaios clínicos randomizados (ECR) são o padrão ouro para desenho experimental de estudo ou ensaio clínico. Apenas por meio de uma investigação do tipo ECR é possível avaliar e demonstrar a relação de causa-e-efeito entre um conjunto de variáveis independentes e dependentes. O ECR adicionou vantagens em relação aos outros modelos experimentais, principalmente devido à presença de um grupo controle. Existem várias críticas à validade interna das pesquisas em saúde, incluindo preconceitos e desvantagens que são apontadas para seu descrédito. OBJETIVO: O objetivo do presente estudo é informar características, vantagens, desvantagens e desvios deste método científico. MATERIAL E MÉTODOS: Análise crítica de método científico com base em revisão narrativa da literatura. Foi consultada a base de dados Medline por meio dos portais PubMed e Scopus, sem data de início e até julho de 2020, para extração das informações relativas aos ECR. Apenas artigos de língua inglesa foram incluídos, usando as palavras-chave "estudo randomizado controlado", "ensaio clínico randomizado", "projeto experimental" e "estudo experimental", intercaladas pelos operadores booleanos "AND ," "OR" e "NOT". Anais de conferências e resumos não foram considerados para a análise dos dados. RESULTADOS: Dos ECR selecionados, foram extraídas características, vantagens, desvantagens, importância e vantagens dos controles em pesquisa, o princípio de equilíbrio, ensaios clínicos randomizados na população pediátrica, ECR na população geriátrica, ameaças à validade interna e medidas para minimização de viéses e preconceitos em ECR. CONCLUSÃO: Tópicos relevantes dos ECR foram explicados nesta revisão que devem guiar pesquisadores clínicos.
Randomized controlled trial (RCT) is the gold standard of experimental design or clinical trial design. Only by RCT in research, the cause-and-effect relationship between a set of independent and dependent variables could be demonstrated. RCT has added advantages over other experimental designs due to the presence of the control group. The importance of control in health research trials and its advantages to be elaborated. Though various threats to internal validity in health research trials could be minimized by RCT, various biases in RCT and disadvantages add to its discredit. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present narrative review is to brief the characteristics, advantages, disadvantages, and various biases in RCT. METHODS: This review does not follow the PRISMA statement, as it was a narrative review. Two databases, namely, Medline through PubMed and Scopus, were searched from inception to July 2020 for the information pertaining to RCTs and included in this narrative review. Only English language articles were searched with the keywords, "Randomized controlled trial," "Randomized clinical trial," "experimental design," and "experimental study." These keywords are linked together by the Boolean words, "AND," "OR" and "NOT." Conference proceedings and only abstracts were not considered for the review. RESULTS: RCTs were explained under characteristics, advantages, disadvantages, importance, and advantages of controls in research, the principle of equipoise, RCTs in the pediatric population, RCTs in the geriatric population, threats to internal validity and steps to minimize them and various biases in RCTs. CONCLUSION: The narrative presentation of RCTs under various important topics have been explained in this review.