Examining the micro‐level challenges experienced by publicly funded university principal investigators

O’Kane, Conor; Haar, Jarrod; Zhang, Jing A.

doi:10.1111/radm.12511

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 61 publications

(119 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, it is still worth noting that specific judicial interpretations should be made for the three clinical trials at the national level. Or provide some alternatives for evaluating the PI's capabilities, because multi-dimensional evaluation of a PI's ability is more advantageous (O'Kane et al, 2021). Especially to solve the difficulties of grass-roots hospitals and new PIs, and avoid being trapped in a chicken-and-egg cycle.…”

Section: Problems and Challenges Still Facingmentioning

confidence: 99%

China’s drug clinical trial institution record-keeping system: Qualification requirements for PI are the key

Huang

Huang²,

Luo³

et al. 2023

Front. Pharmacol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has been 3 years since China implemented new management regulations for drug clinical trial institutions in December 2019, the most important of which is to change the qualification recognition of drug clinical trial institutions into record-keeping system. The original intention of the institution record-keeping system was to solve the shortage of clinical trial resources in China, effectively expand the number of clinical trial institutions, and effectively alleviate the contradiction between medical treatment and scientific research. After implementing the record-keeping system, although these goals have been achieved to a certain extent, there are still areas worthy of optimization and improvement. Therefore, we evaluated the new process, in particular the requirements, in order to see what possible barriers in the record-keeping system of institutions. We find that the requirements for principal investigator (PI) qualifications are the key to the record-keeping system. This reflects the shift of Chinese regulators’ supervision of clinical trials to supervision of the ability to conduct clinical trials. However, the ambiguity of the definition of PI qualification has hindered implementation of the record-keeping system and reduced the release of clinical trial resources.

show abstract

Section: Problems and Challenges Still Facingmentioning

confidence: 99%

China’s drug clinical trial institution record-keeping system: Qualification requirements for PI are the key

Huang

Huang²,

Luo³

et al. 2023

Front. Pharmacol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…5 5 O'Kane et al (2022) highlight the importance of the universities pre‐grant funding support to the researchers in New Zealand's universities.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Similar‐to‐me effects in the grant application process: Applicants, panellists, and the likelihood of obtaining funds

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We analyse if and how the characteristics of grant research panels affect the applicants' likelihood of obtaining funding and, especially, if particular types of panels favour particular types of applicants. We use the UK's Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) award decisions to test the similar‐to‐me hypothesis for the first time in the grant context. Our main results indicate that panel members tend to favour more (or penalise less) applicants with similar characteristics to them, as the similar‐to‐me hypothesis suggests. We show, for instance, that the quality of the applicants is more critical for panels of high quality than for panels of relatively lower quality, that basic‐oriented panels tend to penalise applied‐oriented applicants, and that panels with fewer female members tend to penalise teams with more female applicants. As a whole, we show that similar‐to‐me effects are simultaneously at work for a wide variety of functional, job‐related research characteristics as well as for more well‐known demographic attributes.

show abstract

Academic entrepreneurship in the humanities and social sciences: a systematic literature review and research agenda

Cunningham,

Miller,

Perea-Vicente

2024

J Technol Transf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The predominant empirical focus of academic entrepreneurship research has been in the science, technology and engineering domains. To date there has been a limited research and empirical focus on academic entrepreneurship in the humanities, arts and social sciences (HASS). This is against a background of the growing societal and policy recognition of the important contributions and impact of HASS based research. The purpose of this paper through a systematic literature review is to examine the current state of academic entrepreneurship research in HASS. Our systematic literature identified four key themes namely, actors,barriers,mechanismsandmeasurementandevaluation. From this, we develop and outline a research agenda for academic entrepreneurship in HASS.

show abstract

Examining the micro‐level challenges experienced by publicly funded university principal investigators

Cited by 5 publications

References 61 publications

China’s drug clinical trial institution record-keeping system: Qualification requirements for PI are the key

China’s drug clinical trial institution record-keeping system: Qualification requirements for PI are the key

Similar‐to‐me effects in the grant application process: Applicants, panellists, and the likelihood of obtaining funds

Academic entrepreneurship in the humanities and social sciences: a systematic literature review and research agenda

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About