A Vignette-based Randomized Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Impact of Supervisor's Role on Research Practices of Doctoral Students

The Study Focus on no Specific Condition Clinical Trial

Official title:

A Vignette-based Randomized Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Impact of Supervisor's Role on Research Practices of Doctoral Students Facing Dilemma Situations

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Not yet recruiting

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT04263506
• Other study ID #: ISB-014
• Status: Not yet recruiting
• Phase: N/A
• Start date: March 1, 2020
• Est. completion date: December 1, 2020

Study information

• Verified date: January 2020
• Source: Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris
• Contact: Isabelle Boutron, Professor
• Phone: +33 (0)1.42.34.78.33
• Email: isabelle.boutron[@]aphp.fr
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

This study aims to evaluate the influence of supervisors on PhD students' research practice (i.e., an environment where there is a lack of opposition to detrimental research practice from the supervisor)

Description:

PhD students are the next generation of researchers and will present the field in the future. However, several environmental factors might influence their research practice. In this study, we will evaluate the influence of supervisors on PhD students' research practice (an environment where there is a lack of opposition to detrimental research practice from the supervisor).

Objective: To evaluate the influence of supervisors on PhD students' research practice

Design: A randomized controlled trial

1. Intervention: Participants will be shown two case vignettes describing dilemma situations in research reported with and without the role of the supervisor.

2. Participants: The participants will be PhD students in all biomedical disciplines.

3. Sample size will be 300 participants

4. Primary outcome: In each vignette, participants will have to indicate which solution they prefer on a semantic differential scale, rated from - 5 to -1 (preference for solution A) and from 1 to 5 (preference for solution B). Participants will be forced to make a choice between the 2 solutions. The primary outcome will be the mean preference score.

5. This study is approved by ethics review regulations by INSERM (CEEI-IRB): IRB00003888

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Not yet recruiting
• Enrollment: 300
• Est. completion date: December 1, 2020
• Est. primary completion date: December 1, 2020
• Accepts healthy volunteers: No
• Gender: All
• Age group: 18 Years to 65 Years

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• PhD students in biomedical sciences

Exclusion Criteria:

• NA

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• The Study Focus on no Specific Condition

Intervention

Other:
• Vignette with emphasis on supervisor's opinion
A vignette describing a dilemma situation for a researcher (e.g. adding an honorary author) with or without the description of supervisor's advice that does not oppose to detrimental research practice (i.e. the supervisor is fine with whatever the PhD student decides in the dilemma).

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
n/a

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	Mean preference score	In each vignette, we will ask participants, what would you do if you are in the place of the character in the vignette? Participants will have to indicate which solution they prefer on a semantic differential scale, rated from - 5 to -1 (preference for solution A) and from 1 to 5 (preference for solution B). We will calculate the mean preference score	Immediate assessment
Secondary	Proportion of students who chose the detrimental research practice	Proportion of students who made choices rated from -5 to -1	Immediate assessment