Impact of Extensive Consultation on Career Development Grant Outcomes
|The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Read our disclaimer for details.|
|ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00662402|
Recruitment Status : Active, not recruiting
First Posted : April 21, 2008
Last Update Posted : October 27, 2017
In this study we wish is to determine whether extensive (up to 15 hours) multidisciplinary consultation in biostatistics, study design, data management, ethics, and writing provided by the UCSF Clinical and Translational Science Institute's (CTSI) Consultation Services program, improves peer review scores of career development grants compared to usual levels of consultation.
We hypothesize that extensive multidisciplinary consultation will improve peer review scores of career development grants compared to usual levels of consultation.
We hypothesize that extensive multidisciplinary consultation will lead to greater numbers of funded grants when compared to the usual levels of consultation.
|Condition or disease||Intervention/treatment|
|Career Development Grant Outcomes||Other: Extensive Consultations|
CTSI Consultation Services is one of the largest programs within the UCSF CTSI. It was created to improve the quality and efficiency of clinical and translational research through the provision of expert consultation. The program is divided into units that provide access to expert consultants in biostatistics, research design (with consultants representing multiple distinct methodologies and disease interests), data management (including data structure and database design), ethics, and scientific writing. With funding from the NIH, the program is able to offer a free hour of consultation in each of its units (up to 4 hours) but charges for additional services to cover costs.
There have been no studies of research consultation services. Though the benefit may seem self evident, such programs are expensive and distract senior researcher from more creative work. Justifying research consultation is important given the multitude of activities vying for attention and funding. Observational studies of the impact of research consultation services will always be limited by confounding, particularly confounding by indication since those seeking such services may be more highly motivated and organized. Thus, a randomized trial is warranted.
|Study Type :||Interventional (Clinical Trial)|
|Actual Enrollment :||132 participants|
|Intervention Model:||Parallel Assignment|
|Masking:||Single (Outcomes Assessor)|
|Official Title:||Impact of Extensive Consultation on Career Development Grant Outcomes|
|Study Start Date :||April 2008|
|Estimated Primary Completion Date :||February 2018|
|Estimated Study Completion Date :||April 2018|
Experimental: 1-Extensive Consultations
Intervention- Receives extensive consulting services
Other: Extensive Consultations
receives 15 free hours of multidisciplinary consultations towards the preparation of their career development grant.
No Intervention: 2-Regular levels of service
Control - Receives regular levels of service; one hour free services from each of the 4 units, with option to pay for more.
- NIH priority score of the reviewed proposal, with unsubmitted or unscored proposals counted as priority scores that are right-censored at 300 (old system) or 50 (new system) [ Time Frame: 30 Months ]
- Percentage of subjects who obtain funding for the submitted proposal [ Time Frame: 30 Months ]
- Institute-specific percentile of the priority score [ Time Frame: 30 Months ]
- Percentage of subjects who submit proposals for funding [ Time Frame: 30 Months ]
- Percentage of subjects who received a good score (<40 or <200) which may be associated with future funding of a resubmission [ Time Frame: 30 Months ]
- Percentage of subjects who obtained any career development award funding [ Time Frame: 30 Months ]
To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the contact information provided by the sponsor.
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT00662402
|United States, California|
|University of California, San Francisco|
|San Francisco, California, United States, 94144|
|Principal Investigator:||Alka Kanaya, MD||University of California, San Francisco|
|Study Director:||Peter Bacchetti, PhD||University of California, San Francisco|
|Study Director:||Clay Johnston, MD, PhD||University of California, San Francisco|