The study of awareness of ukrainian clinical research professionals in gcp
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24959/sphhcj.23.275Abstract
Aim. To assess whether Ukrainian clinical research professionals’ self-assessment of their GCP knowledge matches their actual (tested) GCP knowledge; to assess actual GCP knowledge in populations with different experience level, role in clinical trials, and number of attended GCP trainings; to assess whether short-term GCP trainings suffice for adequate professional level in GCP domain.
Materials and methods. We developed a questionnaire which consisted of the following parts: demographic data, self-assessment of core competencies, tests on the basic issues of ICH GCP and assessment of the necessity for additional training. Data were analysed by using of description statistical methods and Kruskal-Wallis, Chi-square, Fisher exact test, and Mann-Whitney tests. Statistical analyses were performed using Statistica StatSoft software, Version 8.0 (StatSoft Power Solution Inc.).
Results. We received 216 questionnaires with answers; some questionnaires were not fully completed and did not have answers to key questions of the study. Therefore, in the analysis, we included only 186 properly done questionnaires.
Conclusions. Respondents' self-assessment of their competence level in GCP properly matches the test results.
Experience level did not substantially influence GCP knowledge. Regardless of experience level, the respondents demonstrated a low level of knowledge for the questions "randomization purpose according to ICH GCP" and "monitoring purposes according to ICH GCP". Both the group with high self-perceived competence and the group with low self-perceived competence demonstrated the level of knowledge above 70% for all other questions.
Respondents of the group, which brought together representatives of the regulatory authority, research ethics committees and contract research organizations had slightly better results than other clinical research professionals.
The number of trainings attended did not affect the quality of knowledge demonstrated by respondents. Thus, an in-depth long-term academic training for clinical research professionals is warranted and is a possible topic for future research.
Key words: clinical research competence domains; good clinical practice; clinical research professionals; professional development; self-assessment; clinical trials
References
Dobrova V. Y. et al. Joint Task Force Core Competency Framework Adoption Process at a National Level: A Survey of Ukrainian-Based Clinical Research Professionals. Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science. 2022. Т. 56. №. 5. С. 814-821.
Imamura K. et al. International perception of competence, education, and training needs among biomedical professionals involved in medicines development. Frontiers in pharmacology. 2019. Т. 10. С. 188.
Wascher M. et al. Establishing an investigational drugs and research residency at an academic medical center. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy. 2019. Т. 76. №. 22. С. 1862-1867.
Spies R. et al. Concept and development of an interactive tool for trial recruitment planning and management. Trials. 2021. Т. 22. №. 1. С. 1-9.
Schuckman S. et al. Acute care research competencies for clinical research professionals. Journal of clinical and translational science. 2020. Т. 4. №. 6. С. 485-492.
Sonstein S., Seltzer J. H., Silva H., Li R. Moving from compliance to competency: A harmonized core competency framework for the clinical research professional. Clinical Researcher. 2014. С. 17-23.
Sonstein S. A. et al. Leveling the joint task force core competencies for clinical research professionals. Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science. 2020. Т. 54. №. 1. С. 1-20.
Mogre V. et al. Realist synthesis of educational interventions to improve nutrition care competencies and delivery by doctors and other healthcare professionals. BMJ open. 2016. Т. 6. №. 10. С. e010084.
Sonstein, S., Silva, H., Jones, C. T., Calvin-Naylor, N., Halloran, L., & Yrivar-ren, J. L. Global self-assessment of competencies, role relevance, and training needs among clinical research professionals. Clinical Researcher. 2016. № 30(6). С. 42-49.
Behar-Horenstein L. S., Prikhidko A., Kolb H. R. Advancing the Practice of CRCs Why Professional Development Matters. Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science. 2018. Т. 52. №. 6. С. 708-717.
Mitchell E. et al. Where do we go from here? – Opportunities and barriers to the career development of trial managers: a survey of UK-based trial management professionals. Trials. 2020. Т. 21. №. 1. С. 1-13.
Sonstein S. A., Jones C. T. Joint task force for clinical trial competency and clinical research professional workforce development. Frontiers in Pharmacology. 2018. С. 1148.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 National University of Pharmacy
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
