Integrating Sustainability Pillars Into Trial Design Decision-Making: Results of an International Survey.
Clicks: 108
ID: 282157
2025
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
26.7
/100
108 views
28 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
EmergingRanked #6 of 6 articles by views in clinical and translational science
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
The pharmaceutical industry is increasingly shifting to decentralized clinical trials (DCTs) conducted at the patient's home, sometimes including trial material home delivery. The traditional clinical trial (CT) is conducted at the investigational site. Research suggests that centralized and decentralized trials have a large carbon footprint, with DCTs potentially providing patient-centric solutions. However, leaders must determine how to integrate environmental, economic, and social sustainability pillars into their portfolios and subsequent downstream trial-level decisions. An online survey was designed and deployed via Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule's (ETH, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology) SurveySelect software to capture perceptions of priorities and tradeoffs when deciding between a DCT and a traditional CT for each pillar. The survey closed on 31st January 2023. A total of 447 participants responded. The findings revealed that the overall cohort prioritized greenhouse gas emissions (22.4%) for environmental impact, trial probability of success (15%) for economic considerations, and patient convenience (23.3%) for social criteria. Overall, the DCT setting was perceived as more sustainable in all pillars. Participants reported tradeoffs centered on patient engagement and bringing new medicines to the market. The results from this survey provide initial insights into international multistakeholder perceptions of the priorities and tradeoffs when choosing between a traditional CT and DCT. The synthesized perceptions inform three key recommendations: the need (1) for simulation studies to guide holistic decision-making across all pillars as empirical data accumulates, (2) to protect the environment, and (3) to protect the supply chain. As empirical data accumulates, these recommendations provide directionality for further research.
| Reference Key |
singh2025integrating
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Singh, Pritibha; Sverdlov, Oleksandr; Beckman, Robert A; Burden, Andrea M |
| Journal | clinical and translational science |
| Year | 2025 |
| DOI |
10.1111/cts.70241
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.