Skip to main content

Case 33: Multicenter Trials

  • Chapter
Book cover Clinical Research
  • 1573 Accesses

Abstract

You, as an assistant professor, are invited to participate in a multicenter trial evaluating a new antiemetic. You are not aware of all the advantages and disadvantages of multicenter trials. But you do know that if you are the principal investigator (PI) in a multicenter trial, you have full control of the study execution and you will be the first author. It is well known that these trials generate a lot of research dollars. The funds go mainly to pay several research nurses to help do the study. The excess money is often used for other unfunded studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. White PF. The importance of transparency in industry-sponsored multicenter clinical studies. Anesth Analg. 2007;105:1861.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Gan TJ, Apfel CC, Kovac A, Philip BK, Singla N, Minkowitz H, Habib AS, Carides A, Horgan KJ, Evans JK, Lawsson FC. The importance of transparency in industry-sponsored multicenter clinical studies. Anesth Analg. 2007;105:1861–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Saidman LJ. Unresolved issues relating to peer review, industry support of research, and conflict of interest. Anesthesiology. 1994;80:491–2.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Peterson FJ. Industry support of research and conflict of interest. Anesthesiology. 1994;81:270.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Eger EI. Motivation, bias and scientific integrity. Anesthesiology. 1994;81:270–1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Davidoff F, DeAngelis CD, Drazen JM, Hoey J, Hojgaard L, Horton R, Nicholls MG, Nylenna M, Overbeke AJ, Sox HC, Van Der Weyden MB, Wilkes MS. Sponsorship, authorship and accountability. Lancet. 2001;358:854–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Brennan TA, Rothman DJ, Blank L, Blumenthal D, Chimonas SC, Cohen JJ, Goldman J, Kassirer JP, Kimball H, Naughton J, Smelser N. Health industry practices that create conflicts of interest: a policy proposal for academic medical centers. JAMA. 2006;295:429–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Newcombe JP, Kerridge IH. Assessment of human research ethics committees of potential conflicts of interest arising from pharmaceutical sponsorship of clinical research. Intern Med J. 2007;37:12–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Brock-Utne, J.G. (2015). Case 33: Multicenter Trials. In: Clinical Research. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2516-2_33

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2516-2_33

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-2515-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-2516-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics