Establishing a successful clinical research program

Clean and sustainable environment problems in forested areas related to recreational activities: case of Lithuania and Turkey

Introduction

With the acceleration of social life, people's interest and demand for forestry recreation activities is increasing. However, with this increase, it is inevitable that negative environmental effects will occur. Particularly mass participation poses an important risk for environmental sustainability. In this context, the aim of this study is to determine the recreational activities organized in forest areas in Turkey and Lithuania, the environmental effects of these activities and the precautions to be taken.

Methods

In Turkey and Lithuania, interviews were conducted to determine the attitudes of experts involved in recreational activity processes towards a clean environment and environmental sustainability. A semi-structured interview form was used in the interviews with forest operators and other experts. The sample group of the research consists of 17 experts from Turkey and Lithuania.

Results

According to the results of the research, recreational activities are organized in forest areas in both countries, but the most important problem related to these activities is waste production. In addition, there is also damage to the natural environment. Although there are legal regulations in both countries, there are no definite results in solving environmental problems.

Conclusions

It can be said that necessary measures such as raising awareness of people and ecological education should be taken in order to ensure the right of individuals to live in a safe and clean environment and at the same time to ensure sustainability in forest areas. as the improvement of legal regulation.

Current scenario and future perspectives of clinical research in Brazil: a national survey

Background

Epidemiological and clinical cancer research is essential to understanding tumour behaviour and developing new therapies in oncology. However, several countries including Brazil as well as many other regions of the world have limited participation in cancer research. Despite 625,000 new cancer cases recorded in Brazil in 2022, only 2.2% of ongoing cancer clinical trials are available in the country. We conducted an online survey to describe physician engagement with research and to identify the main barriers precluding participation in and conduct of clinical cancer research in the country.

Methods

An anonymous online survey of 23 objective questions was sent by e-mail to Brazilian members of the Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group and the Brazilian Society of Clinical Oncology. The first 13 questions addressed demographic information, medical training and previous research participation. In the second part, the main barriers to engagement and participation in clinical trials in Brazil were addressed. Continuous variables were measured by median and range. Analyses were performed using SAS statistical software (version 9.4; SAS Institute, Inc. Cary, NC).

Results

109 physicians answered the survey. Most participants were oncologists (N = 98, 89.9%), living in capital cities (N = 84, 77.1%), were from the Southeast region of Brazil (N = 63, 57.8%) and worked at institutions providing exclusively private healthcare (N = 59, 54.1%). Of the 109 respondents, 83 (76.1%) reported working in research centres (as investigators or sub-investigators). Surprisingly, 31.2% of physicians recognised they invite less than 1% of their patients to participate in clinical trials, even though 98 (89.9%) considered the participation of patients in clinical trials extremely relevant. The main barriers compromising the conduct of research in the country were the low number of available trials (48.2%) and the lack of qualified human resources to staff research sites (22.9%). Other reported barriers were the lengthy regulatory approval process (42.2%), followed by a lack of awareness of clinical research by patients resulting in low recruitment rates (24.1%). Of the 26 (23.8%) respondents not working with research, 25 (96.1%) reported interest in being involved, 31.8% have tried participating in research and 62.4% reported limited knowledge of trial procedures.

Conclusion

These results suggest a clear need to further engage physicians in clinical research activities in Brazil. Patient education strategies should improve the low recruitment rates and secondarily increase the number of proposed trials in the country.

How we established a multidisciplinary program for vascular anomalies

The care of patients with vascular anomalies is quickly becoming a complex field requiring high-quality, coordinated multidisciplinary care. In this article, we review the history of multidisciplinary care in this field, discuss the benefits of this model of care, and outline some of the essential components and structure of a successful vascular anomalies team. We provide an overview of two example programs and a roadmap for other centers to develop their own multidisciplinary vascular anomalies teams.

Training methods that improve MD-PhD student self-efficacy for clinical research skills

Introduction:

MD-PhD training programs train physician-scientists to pursue careers involving both clinical care and research, but decreasing numbers of physician-scientists stay engaged in clinical research. We sought to identify current clinical research training methods utilized by MD–PhD programs and to assess how effective they are in promoting self-efficacy for clinical research.

Methods:

The US MD–PhD students were surveyed in April–May 2018. Students identified the clinical research training methods they participated in, and self-efficacy in clinical research was determined using a modified 12-item Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory.

Results:

Responses were received from 61 of 108 MD–PhD institutions. Responses were obtained from 647 MD–PhD students in all years of training. The primary methods of clinical research training included no clinical research training, and various combinations of didactics, mentored clinical research, and a clinical research practicum. Students with didactics plus mentored clinical research had similar self-efficacy as those with didactics plus clinical research practicum. Training activities that differentiated students who did and did not have the clinical research practicum experience and were associated with higher self-efficacy included exposure to Institutional Review Boards and participation in human subject recruitment.

Conclusions:

A clinical research practicum was found to be an effective option for MD–PhD students conducting basic science research to gain experience in clinical research skills. Clinical research self-efficacy was correlated with the amount of clinical research training and specific clinical research tasks, which may inform curriculum development for a variety of clinical and translational research training programs, for example, MD–PhD, TL1, and KL2.

Critical Aspects of a Sustainable Clinical Research Program in the Community-Based Oncology Practice

Increasing enrollment into clinical trials is a top priority across the field of oncology. Because the vast majority of those afflicted with cancer receive their care in the community, creating strong clinical research programs in the community-based setting is important. This article comprehensively outlines the most important elements of creating and sustaining a successful community-based research program. Establishing a clear mission and defining the scope of the research program in collaboration with key physicians and administrative leadership are critical to success. Standard operating procedures should detail operational processes. Ensuring sound financial planning and protected physician time are crucial for a healthy program. Providing mentorship opportunities to investigators and other team members will provide necessary guidance for junior investigators and long-term program stability. Prioritizing provider and patient volunteer engagement through education and awareness will potentially improve enrollment and research ownership. Incorporating administrative and clinical research staff and health care providers, including physicians, advanced practice providers, and pharmacists, will result in a multidisciplinary and unified approach and may also promote research as a routine part of patient care. Regular safety and scientific meetings will reduce regulatory complications and, most importantly, improve patient care. Other keys to a successful program include establishing a diverse trial portfolio, collaboration between different institutions, and ensuring appropriate technological infrastructure. Serial programmatic review provides opportunities to refine suboptimal practices and recognize successful strategies. Community-based research programs are critical to improve access to optimal cancer care. Implementation of successful programs is possible with a collaborative and multidisciplinary approach.

Design and Implementation of an Infrastructure Program to Support Clinical Research in Surgery

Barriers to active participation in clinical research among academic surgeons include insufficient research training and mentorship, increased clinical demands, lack of protected research time, limited access to resources, complex regulatory requirements, and a highly competitive research funding environment. We describe the development and implementation of a novel clinical research infrastructure program designed to attenuate these barriers and increase clinical research engagement and productivity in a large academic surgery department. Interim outcomes show a high utilization of program services across all divisions within the department, a substantial increase in new clinical research protocols, more applications submitted to funding agencies, and a high level of user satisfaction. We discuss how a departmental infrastructure program can simultaneously address barriers faced by surgeon clinical researchers and foster continuation of the longstanding tradition of innovation and discovery in academic surgery.