Research on Core Competency Elements of Clinical Investigators.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q4 MEDICAL INFORMATICS Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-11-29 DOI:10.1007/s43441-024-00688-5
Xin Wang, Shuang Zhao, Han Yang, Miao Miao, Siwei An, Wenbing Yao
{"title":"Research on Core Competency Elements of Clinical Investigators.","authors":"Xin Wang, Shuang Zhao, Han Yang, Miao Miao, Siwei An, Wenbing Yao","doi":"10.1007/s43441-024-00688-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To construct a competency model for clinical investigators involved in the process of new drug development, providing a reference for the training, selection and assessment of clinical investigators.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Behavioral Event Interview (BEI) method was used to interview 12 excellent clinical investigators and 8 clinical investigators of average performance. Each competency characteristic was extracted from the interview text by semantic coding. Total frequency, total score, average score and highest score were calculated for each competency element. Category agreement coefficient, coefficient of reliability and Spearman correlation coefficient were used to assess the consistency of two coders for coding and classification. Independent-samples Mann-Whitney U test was applied to compare the differences in competency elements between the group of excellent clinical investigators and the group of average investigators.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The average coefficient of category agreement was 0.671, and the average coefficient of reliability was 0.803. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in the aspect of interview time (P = 0.190) and the interview words (P = 0.184), indicating comparability between the two groups. However, there was a clear performance difference between the excellent and average groups. In addition, we found that the competency model for clinical investigators contained 24 prominent competence elements and 8 benchmark competency elements.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Clinical investigator is a medical professional who is involved in a highly research-intensive and practical job, where prominent competency element largely reflects clinical practice skills, innovation and awareness of Good Clinic Practice (GCP). Our results provide a reference for assessing clinical investigators' competencies, encouraging and guiding them to modify their behaviors according to the competency model, and also cultivating clinical investigators so as to improve the competence level of clinical investigators.</p>","PeriodicalId":23084,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science","volume":" ","pages":"45-53"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43441-024-00688-5","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: To construct a competency model for clinical investigators involved in the process of new drug development, providing a reference for the training, selection and assessment of clinical investigators.

Methods: The Behavioral Event Interview (BEI) method was used to interview 12 excellent clinical investigators and 8 clinical investigators of average performance. Each competency characteristic was extracted from the interview text by semantic coding. Total frequency, total score, average score and highest score were calculated for each competency element. Category agreement coefficient, coefficient of reliability and Spearman correlation coefficient were used to assess the consistency of two coders for coding and classification. Independent-samples Mann-Whitney U test was applied to compare the differences in competency elements between the group of excellent clinical investigators and the group of average investigators.

Results: The average coefficient of category agreement was 0.671, and the average coefficient of reliability was 0.803. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in the aspect of interview time (P = 0.190) and the interview words (P = 0.184), indicating comparability between the two groups. However, there was a clear performance difference between the excellent and average groups. In addition, we found that the competency model for clinical investigators contained 24 prominent competence elements and 8 benchmark competency elements.

Conclusions: Clinical investigator is a medical professional who is involved in a highly research-intensive and practical job, where prominent competency element largely reflects clinical practice skills, innovation and awareness of Good Clinic Practice (GCP). Our results provide a reference for assessing clinical investigators' competencies, encouraging and guiding them to modify their behaviors according to the competency model, and also cultivating clinical investigators so as to improve the competence level of clinical investigators.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
临床调查员核心能力要素研究。
背景:构建参与新药开发过程的临床研究者胜任力模型,为临床研究者的培养、选拔和考核提供参考。方法:采用行为事件访谈法(Behavioral Event Interview, BEI)对12名优秀临床调查员和8名表现一般的临床调查员进行访谈。通过语义编码从访谈文本中提取各胜任特征。计算每个胜任力要素的总频率、总分、平均分和最高分。采用类别一致系数、信度系数和Spearman相关系数评价两种编码器编码和分类的一致性。采用独立样本Mann-Whitney U检验比较优秀临床调查员组与一般临床调查员组胜任力要素的差异。结果:分类一致性平均系数为0.671,信度平均系数为0.803。两组在访谈时间(P = 0.190)和访谈字数(P = 0.184)方面均无显著差异,具有可比性。然而,优秀组和一般组之间存在明显的表现差异。此外,我们发现临床研究人员胜任力模型包含24个突出胜任力要素和8个基准胜任力要素。结论:临床调查员是研究强度高、实践性强的医学专业人员,其胜任力要素突出,在很大程度上反映了临床实践技能、创新能力和良好临床实践意识。本研究结果可为临床研究者的胜任力评估、鼓励和指导临床研究者根据胜任力模型调整行为、培养临床研究者以提高临床研究者的胜任力水平提供参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science
Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science MEDICAL INFORMATICS-PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
13.30%
发文量
127
期刊介绍: Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science (TIRS) is the official scientific journal of DIA that strives to advance medical product discovery, development, regulation, and use through the publication of peer-reviewed original and review articles, commentaries, and letters to the editor across the spectrum of converting biomedical science into practical solutions to advance human health. The focus areas of the journal are as follows: Biostatistics Clinical Trials Product Development and Innovation Global Perspectives Policy Regulatory Science Product Safety Special Populations
期刊最新文献
Impact of Rule 11 on the European Medical Software Landscape: Analysis of EUDAMED and Further Databases Three Years After MDR Implementation. Basic Considerations for Data Pooling Strategy in Multi-Regional Clinical Trials (MRCTs). Global Harmonization of Biosimilar Development by Overcoming Existing Differences in Regional Regulatory Requirements - Outcomes of a Descriptive Review. A Consistent Lack of Consistency: Definitions, Evidentiary Expectations and Potential Use of Meaningful Change Data in Clinical Outcome Assessments Across Stakeholders. Results from a DIA Working Group Literature Review and Survey. A Five-Year Analysis of Market Share and Sales Growth for Original Drugs after Patent Expiration in Korea.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1