Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Jun 29:19:100608.
doi: 10.1016/j.conctc.2020.100608. eCollection 2020 Sep.

Site engagement for multi-site clinical trials

Dana Goodlett  1 , Anna Hung  2 , Ashley Feriozzi  1 , Hien Lu  1 , Justin E Bekelman  1 , C Daniel Mullins  3
Affiliations

Site engagement for multi-site clinical trials

Dana Goodlett et al. Contemp Clin Trials Commun. .

Abstract

Multi-site clinical trials are essential within medical practice to help drive reliable and generalizable knowledge on advancing medical treatments. Although the success of multi-site trials is significantly dependent on local clinician and site research teams, best practices for engagement of site teams, or "site engagement," has not been extensively discussed. Site engagement centers on including sites in the planning and implementation of clinical trials to promote trial enrollment, compliance, and applicability to local contexts. Using a case example from the RadComp Trial, a longitudinal, multi-site clinical trial, novel site engagement practices are provided across three major research phases. In the Planning Phase, site engagement builds partnerships and commitment by active elicitation of information on site specific processes and feedback on trial design. In the Conducting Phase, sustained engagement encourages bi-directional communication and facilitates learning networks for enhanced site performance. In the Dissemination Phase, site and community partnerships are leveraged to create locally designed dissemination plans for broader scientific reach and impact. Site engagement practices discussed in this paper can be replicated or molded for application in other multi-site clinical trials.

Keywords: Clinical trial design; Comparative effectiveness research; Multi-site clinical trials; Research engagement; Site engagement.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

References

    1. Woodcock J., Ware J.H., Miller P.W., McMurray J.J.V., Harrington D.P., Drazen J.M. Clinical trials series. N. Engl. J. Med. 2016;374 doi: 10.1056/NEJMe1601510. 2167–2167. - DOI
    1. Mullins C.D., Vandigo J., Zheng Z., Wicks P. Patient-centeredness in the design of clinical trials. Value Health. 2014;17:471–475. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2014.02.012. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Holm K.E., Casaburi R., Cerreta S., Gussin H.A., Husbands J., Porszasz J., Prieto-Centurion V., Sandhaus R.A., Sullivan J.L., Walsh L.J., Krishnan J.A. Patient involvement in the design of a patient-centered clinical trial to promote adherence to supplemental oxygen therapy in COPD. Patient. 2016;9:271–279. doi: 10.1007/s40271-015-0150-z. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sharma N.S. Patient centric approach for clinical trials: current trend and new opportunities. Perspect. Clin. Res. 2015;6:134–138. doi: 10.4103/2229-3485.159936. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Denicoff A.M., McCaskill-Stevens W., Grubbs S.S., Bruinooge S.S., Comis R.L., Devine P., Dilts D.M., Duff M.E., Ford J.G., Joffe S., Schapira L., Weinfurt K.P., Michaels M., Raghavan D., Richmond E.S., Zon R., Albrecht T.L., Bookman M.A., Dowlati A., Enos R.A., Fouad M.N., Good M., Hicks W.J., Loehrer P.J., Lyss A.P., Wolff S.N., Wujcik D.M., Meropol N.J. The national cancer Institute–American society of clinical oncology cancer trial accrual symposium: summary and recommendations. JOP. 2013;9:267–276. doi: 10.1200/JOP.2013.001119. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources