Register Now: Beyond EDC: Designing a Connected Data Strategy for Predictive Clinical Development
|Articles|May 1, 2010

Applied Clinical Trials

  • Applied Clinical Trials-05-01-2010
  • Volume 0
  • Issue 0

Refutable Rates

Author(s)TTC

Perhaps few issues elicit more interest in clinical trial agreements (clinical grants) than the overhead portion of the contract. Clinical trial agreements typically have three parts: procedures, nonprocedures, and overhead.

Perhaps few issues elicit more interest in clinical trial agreements (clinical grants) than the overhead portion of the contract. Clinical trial agreements typically have three parts: procedures, nonprocedures, and overhead.

Procedures are those medical activities directly related to the protocol that may range from a blood draw to something far more complex. Nonprocedures include an equally broad range of activities, such as study coordinator time, facility charges, patient reimbursement, and meals.

Overheads are indirect institutional costs allocated to individual departments and their programs. These indirect costs can include such illustrative items as costs of the institution's general management, building maintenance, general administration, and in some cases, general marketing efforts.

Here we report U.S. overhead rates. Few pharmaceutical companies are willing to pay overhead costs to office-based investigators. However, most clinical trial agreements with institutions include an overhead figure.

Clinical grant data in GrantPlan from companies conducting 76% of all clinical studies demonstrate that, in general, overheads at academic medical centers are slightly higher than at other institutions.

Instiutions vs Actual Agreements in U.S.-Based Overhead Figures

Particularly noteworthy though is the significant difference between the overhead rate reported by the institution, frequently used as the starting point in negotiations, and the actual amount accepted in the contract by the institution.—TTC (For more information, please contact help@ttc-llc.com.)

Articles in this issue

over 16 years ago

Research Integrity Gets Boost

over 16 years ago

EDC & EHR Integration

over 16 years ago

Me-Too's Struggle

over 16 years ago

Clinical Trials for Kids

over 16 years ago

act supplement cover

over 16 years ago

A Patient Universe

over 16 years ago

Conversations With Study Volunteers

Related to this article

© photon_photo - © photon_photo - stock.adobe.com
Standardized measurement across five oncology centers found that clinical research coordinators rated eSource-enabled workflows positively (Overall Mean Satisfaction 5.79 of 7), with reduced manual entry and electronic data transfer earning strong marks, while perceived reduction in sponsor and monitor queries lagged as the one domain below threshold.
Where the Industry Is Headed as Clinical, Operational, and Real-World Data Connect
In this video interview, Rajneesh Patil, global head of AI, digital, and innovation in clinical development at Syneos Health, describes the industry’s trajectory toward a unified intelligence orchestration environment—and explains why the future isn’t one model that knows everything, but a trusted system that brings the right evidence to the right human decision.