Barriers and Challenges to Global Clinical Cancer Research
Open accessAbstract
Background.: There are concerns about growing barriers to cancer research. We explored the characteristics of and barriers to global clinical cancer research. Methods.: The American Society of Clinical Oncology International Affairs Committee invited 300 selected oncologists with research experience from 25 countries to complete a Web-based survey. Fisher's exact test was used to compare answers between participants from high-income countries (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Barriers to clinical cancer research were ranked from 1 (most important) to 8 (least important). Mann-Whitney's nonparametric test was used to compare the ranks describing the importance of investigated obstacles. Results.: Eighty oncologists responded, 41 from HICs and 39 from LMICs. Most responders were medical oncologists (62%) at academic hospitals (90%). Researchers from HICs were more involved with academic and industry-driven research than were researchers from LMICs. Significantly higher proportions of those who considered their ability to conduct academic research and industry-driven research over the past 5 years more difficult were from HICs (73% vs. 27% and 70% vs. 30%, respectively). Concerning academic clinical cancer research, a lack of funding was ranked the most important (score: 3.16) barrier, without significant differences observed between HICs and LMICs. Lack of time or competing priorities and procedures from competent authorities were the second most important barriers to conducting academic clinical research in HICs and LMICs, respectively. Conclusion.: Lack of funding, lack of time and competing priorities, and procedures from competent authorities might be the main global barriers to academic clinical cancer research.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Delays in regulatory and ethical review were mentioned in most articles.
“Delays in regulatory and ethical review were mentioned in most articles [40, 42, 45, 46, 48, 49, 52].”
From Barriers for conducting clinical trials in developing countries—A systematic review (2018) · cites this paper as [40]
Some articles reported difficulty in patient recruitment as a barrier for conducting clinical trials.
“Some articles reported difficulty in patient recruitment [40, 44, 47] as a barrier for conducting clinical trials.”
From Barriers for conducting clinical trials in developing countries—A systematic review (2018) · cites this paper as [40]
Many articles reported that lack of time and other competing priorities related to competing demands of working multiple jobs and their attendant responsibilities was an issue.
“Many articles reported that lack of time [40, 48, 51, 53] and other competing priorities related to the competing demands of working multiple jobs and their attendant responsibilities [40, 43, 45, 46, 48, 51, 53] was an issue.”
From Barriers for conducting clinical trials in developing countries—A systematic review (2018) · cites this paper as [40]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 23 · Cited by 54
- Authors
- Seruga, B., Sadikov, A., Cazap, E. L., Delgado, L. B., Digumarti, R., Leighl, N. B., Meshref, M. M., Minami, H., Robinson, E., Yamaguchi, N. H., Pyle, D., & Cufer, T.
- Affiliations
- Institute of Oncology Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia;
- University of Ljubljana (SI)
- Latin American and Caribbean Society of Medical Oncology (AR)
- Hospital de Clínicas (UY)
- Nizam's Institute of Medical Sciences (IN)
- Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (CA)
- Cairo University (EG)
- Kobe University Hospital (JP)
- Technion – Israel Institute of Technology (IL)
- Universidade de São Paulo (BR)
- American Society of Clinical Oncology (US)
- University Clinic Golnik, Golnik, Slovenia
- ORCID
- Venue
- The Oncologist
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2013-12-09
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 61-67
- ISSN
- 1083-7159 (ISSN-L)
- 1549-490X
- PMC
- PMC3903063
- OpenAlex
- W1991358323
- Cited by
- 54
- References
- 23
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 1.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Licence
- academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model (vor)
- Locations
- The Oncologist (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- American Society of Clinical Oncology International Affairs Committee
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Health and Medical Research Impacts
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Global Health and Surgery
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advances in Oncology and Radiotherapy
- Keywords
- low- and middle-income countries, high-income countries, research funding, research capacity, regulatory process, competing priorities, oncologists' perspectives
- MeSH terms
- Data Collection, Humans, Medical Oncology, Global Health, Internet, Biomedical Research
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review