Exploring implementation challenges of decentralized clinical trials: A qualitative study of policy stakeholder perspectives in Denmark.

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
DIGITAL HEALTH Pub Date : 2025-03-28 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1177/20552076251330519
Ida Hestbjerg, Ditte Bonde Stanek, Ulrik Bak Kirk, Christa Thomsen
{"title":"Exploring implementation challenges of decentralized clinical trials: A qualitative study of policy stakeholder perspectives in Denmark.","authors":"Ida Hestbjerg, Ditte Bonde Stanek, Ulrik Bak Kirk, Christa Thomsen","doi":"10.1177/20552076251330519","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The implementation of decentralized clinical trials (DCTs) has received strong political interest in Denmark. Many policy stakeholders may directly or indirectly influence the implementation at a national strategic level. Diverging interests may drive the implementation process in different directions, which may result in an inefficient and unsustainable process.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The purpose of this study is to explore implementation challenges of DCTs by examining stakeholder interests that emerge in their accounts of the advantages and disadvantages of DCTs.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This qualitative study is based on interviews with 15 participants from 12 institutions comprising patient institutions, healthcare institutions, industry institutions, and political institutions. All interviews were conducted between July and December 2023. Additionally, we included 13 policy documents. Interviews and documents were analysed twice. First, we conducted a data-driven thematic analysis. Second, we performed a second-order analysis informed by paradox theory. We used the concept of paradoxical tensions to understand the contradictions that occurred in the stakeholder accounts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>To make the implementation of DCTs efficient and sustainable, the interests of stakeholders need to be aligned. However, our study demonstrated that the many different stakeholder interests created a knot of paradoxical tensions, which must first be resolved.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Policy stakeholders must collaborate to resolve the paradoxical tensions and align their different interests towards a common objective. The responsibility of the practical implementation process needs to be allocated to one stakeholder or a few stakeholders, who can guide the process.</p>","PeriodicalId":51333,"journal":{"name":"DIGITAL HEALTH","volume":"11 ","pages":"20552076251330519"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11951897/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"DIGITAL HEALTH","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076251330519","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The implementation of decentralized clinical trials (DCTs) has received strong political interest in Denmark. Many policy stakeholders may directly or indirectly influence the implementation at a national strategic level. Diverging interests may drive the implementation process in different directions, which may result in an inefficient and unsustainable process.

Objective: The purpose of this study is to explore implementation challenges of DCTs by examining stakeholder interests that emerge in their accounts of the advantages and disadvantages of DCTs.

Method: This qualitative study is based on interviews with 15 participants from 12 institutions comprising patient institutions, healthcare institutions, industry institutions, and political institutions. All interviews were conducted between July and December 2023. Additionally, we included 13 policy documents. Interviews and documents were analysed twice. First, we conducted a data-driven thematic analysis. Second, we performed a second-order analysis informed by paradox theory. We used the concept of paradoxical tensions to understand the contradictions that occurred in the stakeholder accounts.

Results: To make the implementation of DCTs efficient and sustainable, the interests of stakeholders need to be aligned. However, our study demonstrated that the many different stakeholder interests created a knot of paradoxical tensions, which must first be resolved.

Conclusion: Policy stakeholders must collaborate to resolve the paradoxical tensions and align their different interests towards a common objective. The responsibility of the practical implementation process needs to be allocated to one stakeholder or a few stakeholders, who can guide the process.

探索分散临床试验的实施挑战:对丹麦政策利益相关者观点的定性研究。
背景:在丹麦,分散临床试验(DCT)的实施受到了强烈的政治关注。许多政策利益相关者可能会直接或间接地影响国家战略层面的实施。利益的分歧可能会使实施过程朝着不同的方向发展,从而导致实施过程效率低下且不可持续:本研究的目的是通过研究利益相关者在阐述 DCT 的利弊时所体现的利益,来探讨 DCT 在实施过程中面临的挑战:本定性研究基于对来自 12 个机构(包括患者机构、医疗机构、行业机构和政治机构)的 15 名参与者的访谈。所有访谈均在 2023 年 7 月至 12 月期间进行。此外,我们还纳入了 13 份政策文件。我们对访谈和文件进行了两次分析。首先,我们进行了数据驱动的主题分析。其次,我们根据悖论理论进行了二阶分析。我们使用矛盾张力的概念来理解利益相关者陈述中出现的矛盾:结果:为使 "关键绩效指标 "的实施高效且可持续,利益相关者的利益需要保持一致。然而,我们的研究表明,众多不同的利益相关者的利益造成了矛盾张力的症结,必须首先解决这一问题:结论:政策利益相关者必须通力合作,化解矛盾,将不同的利益统一到共同的目标上来。实际执行过程的责任需要分配给一个或少数几个利益相关者,由他们来指导这一过程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
DIGITAL HEALTH
DIGITAL HEALTH Multiple-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
7.70%
发文量
302
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信