Comparison of Academic and Nonacademic Sites in Multi-Center Clinical Trials

The selection of appropriate subjects is a critical element of successful clinical trials. Failure to properly identify, select, and retain subjects in clinical trials of antidepressant medications may affect the ability to show separation from placebo. Little is known about which type of site, acad...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of clinical psychopharmacology 2012-02, Vol.32 (1), p.65-68
Hauptverfasser: DORDING, Christina M, DALTON, Elizabeth D, PENCINA, Michael J, FAVA, Maurizio, MISCHOULON, David
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The selection of appropriate subjects is a critical element of successful clinical trials. Failure to properly identify, select, and retain subjects in clinical trials of antidepressant medications may affect the ability to show separation from placebo. Little is known about which type of site, academic or nonacademic, is superior in selecting and retaining appropriate subjects. In the present investigation, the authors conducted a retrospective analysis comparing the performance of academic and nonacademic sites in selecting and retaining appropriate subjects in a recently completed multi-site clinical study of aripiprazole augmentation. The authors used a set of operationalized criteria called the SAFER to identify appropriate study subjects. No significant differences were found in rates of SAFER interview passing, study completion, and clinical outcomes between academic and nonacademic sites. Our findings suggest that academic and nonacademic sites are equally effective in their ability to identify and retain appropriate study participants.
ISSN:0271-0749
1533-712X
DOI:10.1097/JCP.0b013e31823f3b47