Assessing the Quality {Company s} Rela7onship with its Inves7ga7ve Sites

Transcription

1 SAMPLE CUSTOM MARKET RESEARCH REPORT Assessing the Quality {Company s} Rela7onship with its Inves7ga7ve Sites An Analysis of Company- Specific Results From the CenterWatch 2013 Survey of Global InvesBgaBve Sites [DATE] 1

2 Table of Contents Slide # Survey Methodology 3 A7ributes Measured 4 Execu?ve Summary 7 Importance of Project A7ributes 9 General Overall Rela?onship Quality Ra?ng 13 {Company Name} Company- Specific Results 19 Reputa?on Ra?ng 99 Respondent Profile 101 2

3 Survey Methodology The survey instrument used by CenterWatch to measure sponsor- site rela?onship quality was conceived in 1997 based on input from representa?ves from sponsor and CRO companies, and inves?ga?ve sites. The survey ques?onnaire was streamlined and op?mized this year. Specifically, a few new project a7ributes were incorporated into the survey this year. Addi?onally, a new ques?on was added reques?ng sites to evaluate sponsor and CRO companies on overall reputa?on in the industry. In the 2011 global survey, Sponsors were evaluated against a total of 29 project a7ributes. In the 2013 global survey, Sponsors were evaluated against a total of 36 project a7ributes. A total of X individual sponsors were evaluated in the 2013 survey due to the overall larger sample size (compared to X CROs in the 2011 survey). For this year s global survey, the ques?onnaire was e- mailed to more than 30,000 sites across the world. A total of 2,032 sites completed the survey, represen?ng a 7% response rate. The majority of respondents originated from North America and Europe. The survey was conducted during the months of November/December 2012 and January Approximately 72% of the sample were inves?gators, with the remaining sample being study coordinators or administrators. Survey respondents had an average of 12 years clinical research experience. A majority of the global sites conduct clinical research on a part-?me basis (57%), while 43% reported full-?me involvement in clinical research. In the 2013 survey, X respondents rated their rela?onship quality with {Sponsor Company}. 3

4 A7ributes Measured OVERALL PROJECT SUPPORT Timely drug availability Efficient query handling process Professional medical staff Professional administra?ve staff Staff easily accessible for escala?on of issues & provides?mely and appropriate resolu?on* Effec?ve use of communica?on technologies (web portals, IVRS, etc.)* STUDY MONITORING SUPPORT Professional, knowledgeable CRAs Low monitor turnover Responsive to inquiries Provides ongoing help in running the study Is organized and prepared *New a'ribute in

5 A7ributes Measured PROTOCOL/STUDY DESIGN & PLANNING Good overall protocol design Protocol where ra?onale aligned with clinical prac?ce reali?es Protocol requires minimal amendments Realis?c project?melines Realis?c pa?ent enrollment goals Uncomplicated CRF design Realis?c?melines for CRF comple?on and return* INNOVATIVENESS U?lizes technology to make processes more efficient Is an innovator in finding ways to improve rela?onships with inves?ga?ve sites* SITE MANAGEMENT Adequate training & guidelines for comple?on of CRF* Adequate training support for trial* Provides pa?ent recruitment planning & implementa?on assistance Supports ini?a?ves to build stronger rela?onships with study volunteers* Holds informa?ve inves?gator mee?ngs *New a'ribute in

6 A7ributes Measured WORKSTYLE Adequately empowers staff to make level- appropriate decisions* Effec?vely works with CROs Maintains open communica?on Has a suppor?ve culture Creates a collabora?ve team environment CONTRACTS & BUDGETS Efficient contract & budget nego?a?on Provides adequate funding for pa?ent recruitment Is flexible willing to modify protocols/ budgets Provides prompt payment of grants Offers realis?c grant payment schedules Provides fair overall grant payment amounts *New a'ribute in

7 Execu?ve Summary This slide will include an Execu?ve Summary of the survey results for {Sponsor Company} What follows are slides with charts detailing the data results for each rela?onship a7ribute Reports usually range from slides 7

8 OVERALL PROJECT SUPPORT A7ribute category 100% 80% 60% CHART INTERPRETATION Company ra?ng from 2013 CenterWatch Global Site Survey 44% 44% 44% 53% Company ra?ng from 2011 CenterWatch Global Site Survey Excellent Percent of Respondents Ra?ng A7ribute Very Important 40% 20% 39% 35% 14% 18% 42% Top rated company for a7ribute 36% 11% 9% Good Neutral Fair Poor 76% 0% Benchmark Company Top- Rated Company 2011 Company Ra?ng Percent Ra?ng Very Important Average Sponsor ra?ng SAMPLE DATA 8