NLM Gateway
A service of the U.S. National Institutes of Health
Your Entrance to
Resources from the
National Library of Medicine
    Home      Term Finder      Limits/Settings      Search Details      History      My Locker        About      Help      FAQ    
Skip Navigation Side Barintended for web crawlers only

Productivity measurement tool for a clinical research organization.

Morris A, Bell P, Brekke S, Dorsey E, Emery B, Enstrom T, Stewart D, Gurr B, Creagh T, Thompson M; International Conference on AIDS.

Int Conf AIDS. 1992 Jul 19-24; 8: 110 (abstract no. PuB 7371).

AIDS Research Consortium of Atlanta, Inc., Georgia.

BACKGROUND: The AIDS Research Consortium of Atlanta, Inc. (ARCA) is a non-profit, decentralized, community-based research organization. ARCA conducts clinical trials on promising new drugs for treatment of HIV infection and associated illnesses. Research clinicians (RN, PA) manage patients on studies in their primary care setting. Because clinicians follow patients on multiple studies of varying difficulty it has been hard to assess individual productivity or to establish a meaningful standard caseload. OBJECTIVE: To develop a productivity measurement tool that would be useful for evaluation of individual performance and site capacity. The tool must be simple, relevant and perceived as fair by the research clinicians. METHODS: The measurement tool was developed by assigning difficulty scores (D) to each protocol. D was determined by measuring a standard group of criterion that each reflected the difficulty of a protocol. Criterion must be both measurable and quantifiable. Criteria were established by group consensus of the clinical staff. A weighted value was assigned to each criterion according to its relative importance. The formula for determining D is the sum of the weighted average value of each criteria (S) divided by a constant (C) [S/C = D]. C was determined by choosing a protocol of known average difficulty and setting its D = 2.5 [C = S/2.5]. D is multiplied by the actual number of patients managed by a clinician for each protocol. This results in a comparable, weighted caseload for each clinician. RESULTS: The following criteria were determined to be most indicative of protocol difficulty; each criteria is followed by a weight assigning its relative importance in determining difficulty: Number of Screen Visits (.05), Number of Study Visits (.25), Number of Screen Procedures (.05), Number of Study Procedures (.10), Stage of Disease (.20), Endpoints (.30) and Dose Regimen (.05). The table below summarizes the application of the tool. TABULAR DATA, SEE ABSTRACT VOLUME.

Publication Types:
  • Meeting Abstracts
Keywords:
  • Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome
  • Biomedical Research
  • Body Size
  • Body Weight
  • Clinical Trials as Topic
  • Efficiency
  • Evaluation Studies
  • Goals
  • HIV Infections
  • Health Personnel
  • Humans
  • Nutritional Status
  • Organizations
  • Research Design
  • Treatment Outcome
  • methods
  • organization & administration
  • psychology
Other ID:
  • 92403420
UI: 102201134

From Meeting Abstracts




Contact Us
U.S. National Library of Medicine |  National Institutes of Health |  Health & Human Services
Privacy |  Copyright |  Accessibility |  Freedom of Information Act |  USA.gov