Justification for conducting neurological clinical trials as part of patient care within private practice

Abstract

Summary The aim of this review was to assess the benefits and drawbacks of conducting neurological clinical trials and research in private practice for the patients, clinician, Practice Manager, sponsors/Clinical Research Organisations (CROs) and Clinical Trial Coordinator (CTC) to determine if this is justified for all involved. A combination of literature reviews, original research articles and books were selected from 2005 to 2015. Provided that the practice has sufficient number of active trials to prevent financial loss, support staff, adequate facilities and equipment and time, the benefits outweigh the drawbacks. Clinical trials provide patients with more thorough monitoring, re‐imbursement of trial‐related expenses and the opportunity to try an innovative treatment at no charge when other options have failed. For the clinician, clinical trials provide more information to ensure better care for their patients and improved treatment methods, technical experience and global recognition. Trials collect detailed and up‐to‐date information on the benefits and risks of drugs, improving society's confidence in clinical research and pharmaceuticals, allow trial sponsors to explore new scientific questions and accelerate innovation. For the CTC, industry‐sponsored clinical trials allow potential entry for a career in clinical research giving CTCs the opportunity to become Clinical Research Associates (CRAs), Study Start‐Up Managers or Drug Safety Associates.

Are articles labelled as “Editor's Choice” downloaded more?

“…As a bibliometric experiment, I made a list of all EC articles from 2016 to 2017, excluding editorials, and examined the number of downloads from the journal's website ascertained by Wiley as of 22 August 2018 (Table ). For the articles published in 2016 and 2017, I also compiled a list of the top 10 downloaded articles from the journal (Table ).…”

Characteristics of chief investigators and principal investigators in Australian and New Zealand radiation oncology clinical trials

“…However, there is recognition that extending trial availability to private and rural and remote centres is also important. This is because it facilitates equitable patient access to novel interventions, enables patients to receive more thorough monitoring and provides the opportunity for health services to gain site credibility 19,20 . Last, given that many trials fall short of meeting scientific objectives due to low accrual rates, an added benefit to site expansion is that it often facilitates faster patient recruitment and thereby minimises trial costs 19,21 …”