• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

提交至法国国家资助计划的方案的命运:一项队列研究。

Fate of protocols submitted to a French national funding scheme: a cohort study.

作者信息

Decullier Evelyne, Huot Laure, Chapuis François R

机构信息

Hospices Civils de Lyon, Pôle Information Médicale Evaluation Recherche, Unité de Recherche Clinique, Lyon, France; Université de Lyon, RECIF, EAM Santé Individu Société 4128, Lyon, France; Université Lyon 1, Lyon, France.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2014 Jun 30;9(6):e99561. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0099561. eCollection 2014.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0099561
PMID:24977416
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4076181/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The fate of clinical research projects funded by a grant has been investigated, but there is no information on the projects which did not receive funding. The fate of these projects is not known: do they apply for and/or receive funding from other sources or are they carried out without specific funding?

PURPOSE

The aim of the study was to describe all clinical research projects submitted to a French national funding scheme (PHRC 2000) and to assess project initiation, completion and publication status taking into account whether or not they received funding.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective cohort. The initial project characteristics were retrieved from the submission files and follow-up information was collected from the primary investigator. The percentages of projects started, completed and published were studied.

RESULTS

A total of 481 projects were studied. Follow-up information was obtained for 366. Overall, 185 projects were initiated (51%); 139 of them were funded by the PHRC 2000 or other sources. The most commonly cited reason for not initiating a project was a lack of funding. Subsequently, 121 of the projects initiated were completed (65%). Accrual difficulties were the main reason cited to explain why studies were stopped prematurely or were still ongoing. Finally, 88 of the completed projects were published (73%). Amongst the completed projects, the only factor explaining publication was the statistical significance of the results.

CONCLUSIONS

Obtainment of funding was a determining factor for project initiation. However, once initiated, the funding did not influence completion or publication.

摘要

背景

由一项拨款资助的临床研究项目的命运已得到调查,但对于未获得资助的项目却没有相关信息。这些项目的命运未知:它们是否申请和/或从其他来源获得资助,或者它们是否在没有特定资金的情况下开展?

目的

本研究的目的是描述提交给一项法国国家资助计划(PHRC 2000)的所有临床研究项目,并考虑项目是否获得资助来评估项目的启动、完成和发表情况。

方法

本研究为回顾性队列研究。从提交文件中检索初始项目特征,并从主要研究者处收集随访信息。研究启动、完成和发表的项目百分比。

结果

共研究了481个项目。获得了366个项目的随访信息。总体而言,185个项目启动(51%);其中139个由PHRC 2000或其他来源资助。未启动项目最常被提及的原因是缺乏资金。随后,启动的121个项目完成(65%)。入组困难是解释研究为何提前停止或仍在进行的主要原因。最后,88个完成的项目发表(73%)。在完成的项目中,解释发表情况的唯一因素是结果的统计学显著性。

结论

获得资金是项目启动的决定性因素。然而,一旦启动,资金并不影响完成或发表。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/36aa/4076181/4e7443076b11/pone.0099561.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/36aa/4076181/4e7443076b11/pone.0099561.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/36aa/4076181/4e7443076b11/pone.0099561.g001.jpg

相似文献

1
Fate of protocols submitted to a French national funding scheme: a cohort study.提交至法国国家资助计划的方案的命运:一项队列研究。
PLoS One. 2014 Jun 30;9(6):e99561. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0099561. eCollection 2014.
2
Impact of funding on biomedical research: a retrospective cohort study.资金对生物医学研究的影响:一项回顾性队列研究。
BMC Public Health. 2006 Jun 22;6:165. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-6-165.
3
Evolution of public funding since primary care research was considered as a priority research domain in france.自初级保健研究被视为法国优先研究领域以来,公共资金的演变情况。
BMC Prim Care. 2024 Apr 27;25(1):142. doi: 10.1186/s12875-024-02384-7.
4
Outcome reporting among drug trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov.临床试验注册中心登记的药物试验结局报告。
Ann Intern Med. 2010 Aug 3;153(3):158-66. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-153-3-201008030-00006.
5
Are We Spending Wisely? Impact of POSNA Grants on Scholarly Productivity and Future Funding Success.我们的资金使用明智吗?小儿骨科医师协会(POSNA)资助对学术产出及未来获得资助成功的影响。
J Pediatr Orthop. 2019 Jan;39(1):e82-e86. doi: 10.1097/BPO.0000000000001261.
6
7
Fate of biomedical research protocols and publication bias in France: retrospective cohort study.法国生物医学研究方案的命运与发表偏倚:回顾性队列研究
BMJ. 2005 Jul 2;331(7507):19. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38488.385995.8F. Epub 2005 Jun 20.
8
[Establishing ophthalmology in the research framework programs of the European Union].[在欧盟研究框架计划中建立眼科学]
Ophthalmologe. 2006 Feb;103(2):91-9. doi: 10.1007/s00347-005-1308-1.
9
Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Foundation Research and Fellowship Awards: A 26-Year Review at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard School of Dental Medicine.口腔颌面外科基金会研究与奖学金奖项:麻省总医院和哈佛牙医学院26年回顾
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016 Feb;74(2):234-8. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2015.08.012. Epub 2015 Aug 28.
10
Comparing National Institutes of Health funding of emergency medicine to four medical specialties.比较美国国立卫生研究院对急诊医学与四个医学专业的资助。
Acad Emerg Med. 2011 Sep;18(9):1001-4. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2011.01138.x. Epub 2011 Aug 19.

引用本文的文献

1
Registration, results reporting, and publication bias of clinical trials supporting FDA approval of neuropsychiatric drugs before and after FDAAA: a retrospective cohort study.FDAAA 前后支持 FDA 批准神经精神药物的临床试验的注册、结果报告和发表偏倚:一项回顾性队列研究
Trials. 2018 Oct 23;19(1):581. doi: 10.1186/s13063-018-2957-0.
2
Unpublished systematic reviews and financial support: a meta-epidemiological study.未发表的系统评价与资金支持:一项元流行病学研究。
BMC Res Notes. 2017 Dec 6;10(1):703. doi: 10.1186/s13104-017-3043-5.
3
Impact of high ambient temperature on unintentional injuries in high-income countries: a narrative systematic literature review.

本文引用的文献

1
From bibliometric analysis to research policy: the use of SIGAPS in Lille University Hospital.从文献计量分析到研究政策:SIGAPS在里尔大学医院的应用
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2006;124:543-8.
2
Impact of funding on biomedical research: a retrospective cohort study.资金对生物医学研究的影响:一项回顾性队列研究。
BMC Public Health. 2006 Jun 22;6:165. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-6-165.
3
Fate of biomedical research protocols and publication bias in France: retrospective cohort study.法国生物医学研究方案的命运与发表偏倚:回顾性队列研究
高环境温度对高收入国家意外伤害的影响:一项叙述性系统文献综述
BMJ Open. 2016 Feb 11;6(2):e010399. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010399.
BMJ. 2005 Jul 2;331(7507):19. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38488.385995.8F. Epub 2005 Jun 20.
4
Do you have NIH funding? Then read this.你有美国国立卫生研究院的资助吗?那就读一读这个。
J Clin Invest. 2005 Jun;115(6):1392. doi: 10.1172/JCI25545.
5
Tracking publication outcomes of National Institutes of Health grants.追踪美国国立卫生研究院资助项目的发表成果。
Am J Med. 2005 Jun;118(6):658-63. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2005.02.015.
6
Role of a research ethics committee in follow-up and publication of results.研究伦理委员会在结果随访与发表中的作用。
Lancet. 2003 Mar 22;361(9362):1015-6. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)12799-7.
7
Publication bias: evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects.发表偏倚:临床研究项目队列研究中延迟发表的证据。
BMJ. 1997 Sep 13;315(7109):640-5. doi: 10.1136/bmj.315.7109.640.
8
NIH clinical trials and publication bias.美国国立卫生研究院的临床试验与发表偏倚。
Online J Curr Clin Trials. 1993 Apr 28;Doc No 50:[4967 words; 53 paragraphs].
9
Factors influencing publication of research results. Follow-up of applications submitted to two institutional review boards.影响研究结果发表的因素。对提交给两个机构审查委员会的申请的跟踪。
JAMA. 1992 Jan 15;267(3):374-8.
10
Publication bias in clinical research.临床研究中的发表偏倚。
Lancet. 1991 Apr 13;337(8746):867-72. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(91)90201-y.