Perceptions of the Research Coordinator Role Among Interventional Pulmonology Researchers

Abstract

R esearch coordinators (variably titled study coordinators, research associates, research assistants, research specialists, trial managers, and other similar) are professional managers and facilitators of translational and clinical research. Responsibilities vary with the research portfolio being managed and commonly include protocol development, subject recruitment, budgeting, monitoring, data management, bio-banking, follow-up, and regulatory duties, among others. [1][2][3][4][5] As clinical trials become more complex, dedicated professional study personnel are essential to effectively navigate the increasing regulatory and administrative burdens required to successfully deliver high-quality research. 3 Despite their vital role within the research infrastructure, the research coordinator's role is poorly defined, their contributions underrecognized, and their training nonstandardized. 3,6,7 Relatedly, there is a high prevalence of burnout and turnover among research coordinators, with obvious implications for ongoing studies as well as the cost to institutions to retain, recruit, and train new personnel. 6,8 Many perceive the role to be a temporary position, often viewed as a bridge to medical school, nursing positions, or other graduate programs, rather than a long-term career. 8 There is little data on investigator and coordinator perceptions of coordinator training, expectations, responsibilities, and career opportunities and, specifically, no data specific to interventional pulmonary. We developed a survey to characterize the landscape of responsibilities, scope of work, job satisfaction, and career opportunities for interventional pulmonology study coordinators. METHODS An online REDCap survey (see SupplementalDigital Content, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/LBR/A306) was distributed through email to the members of the American Association of Bronchology and Interventional Pulmonology and their respective coordinators. Those with current or recent participation in research as an investigator or research coordinator were invited to participate. Data pertaining to perceptions of coordinator training, responsibilities, and retention were obtained. [7][8][9][10] Visual analog scales with 0 indicating no agreement and 100 indicating maximal agreement with a given statement were used; this scale was chosen for easy implementation within an online survey. Betweengroup comparisons with χ 2 and student t-test were performed for categorical and continuous variables, respectively, with the assumption of normal distribution for continuous variables (JASP 0.16.1, Amsterdam, Netherlands). RESULTSOf the 634 people who viewed the survey invitation from the AABIP mailing list, 72 responses were received (32 coordinators, 40 investigators). See Table 1 for detailed respondent demographics. Response rate could not be discretely calculated as it