ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2025
General Practitioners (GP) experiences in managing patients in clinical trials conducted by non-GP specialists: An exploratory qualitative study.
Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: General Practitioners (GPs) in Australia continue to provide primary medical care for patients enrolled in specialist-led clinical trials (CTs), yet research on GPs' experiences in this role remains limited. This study explored Australian GPs' experiences managing CT patients and their perspectives on primary care involvement in clinical research. Methods: This phenomenological study involved 11 semi-structured interviews with GPs in New South Wales, Australia, between July to October 2024, who previously managed patients enrolled in other non-GP subspecialist CTs. The recruitment applied purposive, snowballing and convenience sampling approaches. Interviews were transcribed, inductively coded and thematically analyzed. Results: Analysis revealed four themes: (i) lack of communication from CT teams, (ii) patients' insufficient understanding about their CTs, (iii) time and resource barriers to GP involvement in CTs, (iv) varied opinions about GPs playing an active role as researchers in CTs. Conclusions: This exploratory study highlighted the lack of proper communication gaps between CT teams and GPs, potentially compromising the quality of patient care. Digital health records (such as Australia's My Health Record) could facilitate information sharing. While GPs support primary care research, barriers include limited research training, time constraints, and inadequate resources. Integrating research education into GP training and establishing practice-based research networks could enhance GP participation in CTs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.