Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Clinical Research Environment

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Clinical Research Informatics

Part of the book series: Health Informatics ((HI))

Abstract

Clinical research is an information and resource intensive endeavor, incorporating a broad variety of stakeholders spanning a spectrum from patients to providers to policymakers. Increasingly, the modern clinical research environment incorporates a number of informatics methods and technologies, informed by sociotechnical and information-theoretic frameworks. In this chapter, we introduce the major facets that serve to define the clinical research setting, including the design of clinical studies, clinical research workflow, and information management needs incumbent to such activities. Throughout this review, we will provide a number of exemplary linkages to core biomedical informatics challenges and opportunities and the foundational theories and frameworks underlying such issues. Finally, this chapter places the preceding review in the context of a number of national-scale initiatives that seek to address such needs and requirements.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover 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. Payne PR, Johnson SB, Starren JB, et al. Breaking the translational barriers: the value of integrating biomedical informatics and translational research. J Invest Med. 2005;53:192–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Embi PJ, Payne PR. Clinical research informatics: challenges, opportunities and definition for an emerging domain. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2009;16:316–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Khan SA, Kukafka R, Bigger JT, Johnson SB. Re-engineering opportunities in clinical research using workflow analysis in community practice settings. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2008;2008:363–7.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Finlayson SR. The effect of the current regulatory environment on clinical research: an overview. Surgery. 2009;145:626–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Holzhauser K, Cooke M, Winch S, Davis C. Developing a research-active clinical environment within the emergency department: a case study. J Prof Nurs. 2008;24:36–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gennery B. Academic clinical research in the new regulatory environment. Clin Med. 2005;5:39–41.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Barker KL. Building and supporting effective academic clinical research programs in today’s market-driven health care environment: is research valued and how much and by whom? Exp Biol Med. 2003;228:1269–71.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Kovach JS. Clinical cancer research in a managed-care environment. Cancer Invest. 1998;16:350–2.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Madsen SM, Holm S, Riis P. Attitudes towards clinical research among cancer trial participants and non-participants: an interview study using a Grounded Theory approach. J Med Ethics. 2007;33:234–40.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Laurence DR. Participants in research: patients in clinical trials are protected by consumer regulation. BMJ. 2005;331:110.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Madsen SM, Mizra MR, Holm S, et al. Attitudes towards clinical research amongst participants and nonparticipants. J Intern Med. 2002;251:156–68.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Phipps E, Fleetwood J, Piraino A. Research ethics and clinical trials: fostering collaboration with research participants. Account Res. 1999;6:215–26.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ayme S, Kole A, Groft S. Empowerment of patients: lessons from the rare disease community. Lancet. 2008;371:2048–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Watson MS, Epstein C, Howell RR, et al. Developing a national collaborative study system for rare genetic diseases. Genet Med. 2008;10:325–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Sung NS, Crowley WF, Genel M, et al. Central challenges facing the national clinical research enterprise. JAMA. 2003;289:1278–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Cox K. Setting the context for research: exploring the philosophy and environment of a cancer clinical trials unit. J Adv Nurs. 2000;32:1058–65.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Spilker B. Guide to clinical trials, vol. xxv. New York: Raven; 1991. p. 1156.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Payne PR, Embi PJ, Sen CK. Translational informatics: enabling high throughput research paradigms. Physiol Genomics. 2009;39:131–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Williams BA, Bottegal MT, Francis KA, et al. A post hoc analysis of research study staffing: budgetary effects of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act on research staff work hours during a prospective, randomized clinical trial. Anesthesiology. 2007;107:860–1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Rutledge DN, Ropka M, Greene PE, et al. Barriers to research utilization for oncology staff nurses and nurse managers/clinical nurse specialists. Oncol Nurs Forum. 1998;25:497–506.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Medoff-Cooper B, Lamb AH. The clinical specialist-staff nurse research team: a model for clinical research. Clin Nurse Spec. 1989;3:16–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Goode JV, Mott DA, Chater R. Collaborations to facilitate success of community pharmacy practice-based research networks. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2008;48:153–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Pruchnicki MC, Rodis JL, Beatty SJ, et al. Practice-based research network as a research training model for community/ambulatory pharmacy residents. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2008;48:191–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Westfall JM. Practice-based research is community engagement. J Am Board Fam Med. 2009;22:423–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Williams RL, Shelley BM, Sussman AL. The marriage of community-based participatory research and practice-based research networks: can it work? A research involving outpatient settings network (RIOS Net) study. J Am Board Fam Med. 2009;22:428–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Briggs B. Clinical trials getting a hand. Health Data Manag. 2002;10:56–60, 62.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Ebbert JO, Dupras DM, Erwin PJ. Searching the medical literature using PubMed: a tutorial. Mayo Clin Proc. 2003;78:87–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Eveillard P. Bibliographic databases. Medline via PubMed. Rev Prat. 2000;50(16 Suppl):1–34.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Eysenbach G, Tuische J, Diepgen TL. Evaluation of the usefulness of internet searches to identify unpublished clinical trials for systematic reviews. Med Inform Internet Med. 2001;26:203–18.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Eysenbach G, Wyatt J. Using the internet for surveys and health research. J Med Internet Res. 2002;4:E13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Bates DW, Ebell M, Gotlieb E, et al. A proposal for electronic medical records in U.S. primary care. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2003;10:1–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Clark O, Clark L, Djulbegovic B. Is clinical research still too haphazard? Lancet. 2001;358:1648.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Marks RG, Conlon M, Ruberg SJ. Paradigm shifts in clinical trials enabled by information technology. Stat Med. 2001;20:2683–96.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. McDonald CJ. The barriers to electronic medical record systems and how to overcome them. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1997;4:213–21.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. McDonald CJ, Overhage JM, Tierney WM, et al. The Regenstrief Medical Record System: a quarter century experience. Int J Med Inform. 1999;54:225–53.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Padkin A, Rowan K, Black N. Using high quality clinical databases to complement the results of randomised controlled trials: the case of recombinant human activated protein C. BMJ. 2001;323:923–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Butler D. Data, data, everywhere. Nature. 2001;414:840–1.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Evans D. Database searches for qualitative research. J Med Libr Assoc. 2002;90:290–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Marks L, Power E. Using technology to address recruitment issues in the clinical trial process. Trends Biotechnol. 2002;20:105–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Bates DW, Leape LL, Cullen DJ, et al. Effect of computerized physician order entry and a team intervention on prevention of serious medication errors. JAMA. 1998;280:1311–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Butte AJ, Weinstein DA, Kohane IS. Enrolling patients into clinical trials faster using RealTime Recuiting. Proc AMIA Symp. 2000;2000:111–5.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Teich JM, Merchia PR, Schmiz JL, et al. Effects of computerized physician order entry on prescribing practices. Arch Intern Med. 2000;160:2741–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Holford NH, Kimko HC, Monteleone JP, Peck CC. Simulation of clinical trials. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 2000;40:209–34.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Kim JH, Kohane IS, Ohno-Machado L. Visualization and evaluation of clusters for exploratory analysis of gene expression data. J Biomed Inform. 2002;35:25–36.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Fazi P, Grifoni P, Luzi D, et al. Is workflow technology suitable to represent and manage clinical trials? Stud Health Technol Inform. 2000;77:302–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Fazi P, Luzi D, Manco M, et al. WITH: a system to write clinical trials using XML and RDBMS. Proc AMIA Symp. 2002;2002:240–4.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Goodman KW. Using the web as a research tool. MD Comput. 2000;17:13–4.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Rubin DL, Gennari J, Musen MA. Knowledge representation and tool support for critiquing clinical trial protocols. Proc AMIA Symp. 2000;2000:724–8.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Tai BC, Seldrup J. A review of software for data management, design and analysis of clinical trials. Ann Acad Med Singapore. 2000;29:576–81.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Lutz S, Henkind SJ. Recruiting for clinical trials on the web. Healthplan. 2000;41:36–43.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Greaves AW, Payne PR, Rassenti L, Kpps TJ. CRC Tissue Core Management System (TCMS): integration of basic science and clinical data for translational research. In: AMIA 2003 symposium. Washington, D.C.; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Payne PRO, Greaves AW, Kipps TJ. CRC Clinical Trials Management System (CTMS): an integrated information management solution for collaborative clinical research. In: AMIA 2003 symposium. Washington, D.C.; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Westgren M, Kublickas M. To use internet in collaborative studies and registers. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2000;79:329–30.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Kuchenbecker J, Dick HB, Schmitz K, Behrens-Baumann W. Use of internet technologies for data acquisition in large clinical trials. Telemed J E Health. 2001;7:73–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Merzweiler A, Knaup P, Weber R, et al. Recording clinical data – from a general set of record items to case report forms (CRF) for clinics. Medinfo. 2001;10:653–7.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Wubbelt P, Fernandez G, Heymer J. Clinical trial management and remote data entry on the internet based on XML case report forms. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2000;77:333–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Forrester. Global trial starts using web-enabled EDC capture. Cambridge: Forrester Research, Inc; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  58. El Emam K, Jonker E, Sampson M, et al. The use of electronic data capture tools in clinical trials: web-survey of 259 Canadian trials. J Med Internet Res. 2009;11:e8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, et al. Research electronic data capture (REDCap) – a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42:377–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Nahm ML, Pieper CF, Cunningham MM. Quantifying data quality for clinical trials using electronic data capture. PLoS One. 2008;3:e3049.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Welker JA. Implementation of electronic data capture systems: barriers and solutions. Contemp Clin Trials. 2007;28:329–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Khan H, Khan S, Iqbal A. Knowledge, attitudes and practices around health research: the perspective of physicians-in-training in Pakistan. BMC Med Educ. 2009;9:46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Khan SA, Kukafka R, Payne PR, et al. A day in the life of a clinical research coordinator: observations from community practice settings. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2007;129:247–51.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Horsky J, Zhang J, Patel VL. To err is not entirely human: complex technology and user cognition. J Biomed Inform. 2005;38:264–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Horsky J, Kuperman GJ, Patel VL. Comprehensive analysis of a medication dosing error related to CPOE. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2005;12:377–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Horsky J, Kaufman DR, Patel VL. Computer-based drug ordering: evaluation of interaction with a decision-support system. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2004;107:1063–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Horsky J, Kaufman DR, Patel VL. The cognitive complexity of a provider order entry interface. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2003;2003:294–8.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Payne PR, Mendonca EA, Starren JB. Modeling participant-related clinical research events using conceptual knowledge acquisition techniques. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2007;2007:593–7.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Embi PJ, Payne PR, Kaufman SE, et al. Identifying challenges and opportunities in clinical research informatics: analysis of a facilitated discussion at the 2006 AMIA annual symposium. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2007;2007:221–5.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Starren JB, Payne PR, Kaufman DR. Human computer interaction issues in Clinical Trials Management Systems. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2006;2006:1109.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Buetow K. An infrastructure for interconnecting research institutions. Drug Discov Today. 2009;14:605–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Zerhouni EA. Translational research: moving discovery to practice. Nature. 2007;81:126–8.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Short A, Jackson W, Nugus P. Expanding clinical research capacity through a community of practice (CoPER). Nurse Educ Pract. 2009;10:52–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Fidler DP. “Geographical morality” revisited: international relations, international law, and the controversy over placebo controlled HIV clinical trials in developing countries. Harv Int Law J. 2001;42:299–354.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Pike R, Keech AC, Simes RJ. Clinical trials research in the new millennium: the international clinical trials symposium, Sydney, 21–23 October 2002. Med J Aust. 2003;178:316–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Johnatty RN. Clinical trials in developing countries: discussions at the ‘9th international symposium on long term clinical trials’, London, UK, 19–20 June 2000. Curr Control Trials Cardiovasc Med. 2000;1:55–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Beran RG. The ethics of clinical research and the conduct of clinical drug trials: international comparisons and codes of conduct. Med Law. 2000;19:501–21.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biomedical Informatics, The Ohio State University, 3190 Graves Hall, 333 West 10th Avenue, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA

    Philip R. O. Payne Ph.D

Authors
  1. Philip R. O. Payne Ph.D
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Philip R. O. Payne Ph.D .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Bruce B. Downs Blvd. 12901, Tampa, 33612-4799, Florida, USA

    Rachel L. Richesson

  2. College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Bruce B. Downs Blvd. 12901, Tampa, 33612-4799, Florida, USA

    James E. Andrews

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag London Limited

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Payne, P.R.O. (2012). The Clinical Research Environment. In: Richesson, R., Andrews, J. (eds) Clinical Research Informatics. Health Informatics. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-448-5_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-448-5_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-84882-447-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-84882-448-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation