You are here

Article Text

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

XML
Qualitative research
Research
How to strengthen clinical research in Shenzhen, China: qualitative study
  1. Ping Ji1,
  2. Hongling Chu2,
  3. Chao Zhang3,
  4. Ping Xiao1,
  5. Min Liu4,
  6. Liping Zhou4,
  7. Haibo Wang5,
  8. Yanfang Wang5,
  9. Yangfeng Wu5
  1. 1 Clinical Research Institute, Shenzhen-Peking University-The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology Medical Center, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China
  2. 2 Research Center of Clinical Epidemiology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China
  3. 3 Project Development Department, Shenzhen-Peking University-The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology Medical Center, Shenzhen, China
  4. 4 Research and Education Department, Shenzhen Municipal Health Commission, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China
  5. 5 Clinical Research Institute, Peking University, Beijing, China
  1. Correspondence to Dr Yangfeng Wu; wuyf{at}bjmu.edu.cn

Abstract

Objectives To better understand the strengths and weaknesses, and to propose policy recommendations, regarding conducting high-quality clinical research in Shenzhen, China.

Design A qualitative study conducted from August to November 2016 using a semistructured interview format involving both focus group interviews and individual interviews.

Setting Shenzhen, China.

Participants Stratified purposive and convenience sampling were used. Thirty individuals experienced in conducting and managing clinical research were selected from key stakeholder groups, comprising 11 from local hospitals, 14 from pharmaceutical/medical device companies and 5 from government agencies.

Methods A semistructured interview guide was developed by the study group and used by experienced interviewers in focus group discussions and individual interviews. The interviewees were encouraged to share their opinions freely and discuss their own topics of interest during the interviews. Thematic analysis was used for analysis and all data were coded and extracted using NVivo V.11.0 software.

Results Favourable driving factors for clinical research in Shenzhen identified by all stakeholders included the recent trend of increased governmental funding for clinical research, supportive governmental policies, wide recognition of the value of clinical research and high demands from local industry. The major challenges include a lack of technical infrastructure, weak human research subject protection and a lack of capable research resources.

Conclusions Despite the established strengths, Shenzhen still needs to develop suitable technical platforms, human resources training programmes and strong human research subject protection programmes pertaining to clinical research. This would facilitate the establishment of a functional system that can be expected to lead to increased medical research innovation in Shenzhen.

  • clincial research
  • training
  • techinical platform
  • qualitative research

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024534

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • PJ and HC contributed equally.

    • Contributors YW, YW, Px and PJ conducted the interviews. CZ, ML and LZ contacted the participants and coordinated the study activities. HC, PJ and HW performed all analyses. PJ and HC wrote the first draft of the manuscript and rewrote new drafts based on input from all coauthors; they contributed equally to this paper. YW provided extensive input on the structure of the manuscript, and revisions to the manuscript drafts. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

    • Funding This study was supported by Shenzhen’s Sanming Project of Medicine (ref: SZSM201612061).

    • Disclaimer The funders had no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Ethics approval The Peking University Biomedical Ethics Review Board approved the study.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

    • Data sharing statement Original quotes and audio data from the interviews are available on request by emailing the corresponding author. The data presented were anonymous and the risk of identification is low.

    • Patient consent for publication Not required.