Kagan Jonathan, Lassa Jerome, Zuckerman Judith, Cull Ellen, Boan David, Lysander Julia, Njoh Wissedi, Johnson Kumblytee, Sardana Ratna, Stern Kaytee, Grace Beth, McNay Laura, Tegli Jemee
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, US Department of Health and Human Services, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD, USA.
Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, 5707 Industry Lane, Frederick, MD, USA.
Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2021 Aug 18;24:100833. doi: 10.1016/j.conctc.2021.100833. eCollection 2021 Dec.
Today's clinical trial partnerships frequently join multi-disciplinary investigators and stakeholders, from different countries and cultures, to conduct research with a broad array of goals. This diversity, while a strength, can also foster divergent views about priorities and what constitutes success, thereby posing challenges for management, operations, and evaluation. As a sponsor and partner in such collaborations, we seek to assist and support their development and implementation of sound research strategies, to optimize their efficiency, sustainability, and public health impact. This report describes our efforts using an adaptation of the well-established Kaplan-Norton strategy management paradigm, in our clinical trials setting. We share findings from our first test of the utility and acceptance of this approach for evaluating and managing research strategies in a collaborative clinical research partnership.
Findings from pilot studies and our first implementation in an ongoing clinical research partnership in Liberia, provide initial support for our hypothesis that an adapted version of the Kaplan-Norton strategy management model can have use in this setting. With leadership from within the partnership, analysis artifacts were gathered, and assessments made using standardized tools. Practical feasibility, resonance of the findings with partners, and convergence with other empirical assessments lend initial support for the view that this approach holds promise for obtaining meaningful, useable results for assessing and improving clinical research management.
Engaged leadership, thoughtful timing to align with partnership planning cycles, support for the process, and an eye towards the collaboration's long-term goals appear important for developing model understanding and practice. Skepticism about evaluations, and unease at exposing weaknesses, may hinder the effort. Acceptance of findings and associated opportunities for improvement by group leadership, support a growing sense of validity. Next steps aim to test the approach in other partnerships, streamline the methodology for greater ease of use, and seek possible correlations of strategy management assessments with performance evaluation. There is hardly a better example than the COVID-19 pandemic, to spotlight the need for efficient and effective clinical research partnerships to address global health challenges. While heartened by the collaborative spirit driving the effort so far, we cannot let our enthusiasm lull us into thinking that nobility of purpose or an abundance of good will is sufficient. Careful monitoring and adjustment of clinical research strategy in response to changes (e.g., demographics, pathogen evolution, research acceptance, political and cultural environments) are vital to making the needed adjustments that can guide these programs toward successful outcomes. We hope that our work can raise awareness about the importance, relevance, and feasibility of sound strategy management in clinical research partnerships, especially during this time when there is so much at stake.
如今的临床试验合作常常汇聚了来自不同国家和文化背景的多学科研究人员及利益相关者,以开展具有广泛目标的研究。这种多样性虽是优势,但也可能导致各方在优先事项及何为成功的构成要素上产生不同观点,进而给管理、运营和评估带来挑战。作为此类合作中的资助方和合作伙伴,我们致力于协助并支持制定和实施合理的研究策略,以优化其效率、可持续性及对公共卫生的影响。本报告介绍了我们在临床试验环境中采用经过改良的成熟的卡普兰 - 诺顿战略管理范式所做的工作。我们分享了对该方法在合作性临床研究伙伴关系中评估和管理研究策略的效用及接受度的首次测试结果。
试点研究以及我们在利比里亚一项正在进行的临床研究伙伴关系中的首次应用结果,初步支持了我们的假设,即经过改良的卡普兰 - 诺顿战略管理模型可在此环境中发挥作用。在伙伴关系内部的引领下,收集了分析工件,并使用标准化工具进行了评估。实际可行性、研究结果与合作伙伴的共鸣,以及与其他实证评估的契合度,初步支持了这样一种观点,即该方法有望获得有意义、可用的结果,用于评估和改进临床研究管理。
积极参与的领导力、与伙伴关系规划周期相契合的周到时机、对该过程的支持以及着眼于合作的长期目标,对于形成模型理解和实践似乎很重要。对评估的怀疑以及对暴露弱点的不安可能会阻碍这项工作。团队领导对研究结果及相关改进机会的接受,支持了越来越强烈的有效性认知。下一步旨在在其他伙伴关系中测试该方法,简化方法以使其更易于使用,并探寻战略管理评估与绩效评估之间可能存在的关联。没有比新冠疫情更好的例子能凸显高效且有效的临床研究伙伴关系应对全球卫生挑战的必要性了。尽管到目前为止我们为这种合作精神所鼓舞,但我们不能因热情而误以为目标高尚或善意满满就足够了。根据变化(例如人口统计学、病原体演变、研究接受度、政治和文化环境)仔细监测和调整临床研究策略,对于做出必要调整以引导这些项目取得成功结果至关重要。我们希望我们的工作能够提高人们对临床研究伙伴关系中合理战略管理的重要性、相关性和可行性的认识,尤其是在当前利害攸关的时刻。