Back

Quality Improvement in Clinical Research: ESA Utilization to improve Patient Safety Monitoring, time management, and Research Compliance.

Del Pino, M.; Bonmati, A.; Mendoza, P.

2021-11-09 health systems and quality improvement
10.1101/2021.11.05.21265341 medRxiv
Show abstract

We analyzed the capabilities of Electronic Signature Administrators (ESA) in reporting adverse and serious adverse events (AE/SAE) in clinical trials to improve Principal Investigator (PI) oversight. The current and most conventional way to sing on AE/SAE reports, by wet ink paper signatures, faces long report completion times, miscommunications, and a high rate of error that can put the study and the patient at risk. We demonstrate here that ESAs can easily take over this task, speeding up the process and enhancing patients safety and research compliance. Our results show that the average of 31 days to obtain wet-signatures on AE/SAE reports is reduced to merely 3 days after the implementation of ESA. We also found that research professionals spend more than half an hour in commuting each time they need to get PI signatures, while this time is zero if ESAs are used. Finally, an anonymous survey distributed to coordinators shows that ESAs can be well received when implemented since 86% have used an ESA and are satisfied with it or are interested in using it, while only 14% of the participants are either not interested or not satisfied.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.