Welcome to Clinical Trial Confidential.

We believe the clinical trial industry lacks a platform for open, transparent conversation. This lack of transparency inhibits progress. In this industry, that means patients are the ones that suffer.

Here you can choose to register an account, post anonymously or both. It is our hope that the ability to post anonymously will help foster useful conversation by allowing users to express their opinions without fear of retaliation, fear of appearing ignorant and otherwise allowing users to express opinions that may be contrary to their employer or that their position may not permit.

We believe great ideas should stand on their own merit and not the credentials of their author.

We hope these values will foster an environment of collaboration.

Third Party Providers as Sub-Is

Reply
Guest
#1 · July 22, 2022, 7:02 pm
Quote

Hi Everyone,

At my previous job, whenever we had a doctor performing a service like a PFT, eye exam, colonoscopy, etc. that doctor had to be a sub-I for the study. Is that a necessity? 

I ask because in my current job they don't seem to require this and just have the third party center (like the endoscopy center or ophthalmologists office) sign an MSA and utilize whichever doctor is there.

Click for thumbs down.0Click for thumbs up.0
brad@brad
184 Posts
#2 · August 3, 2022, 2:04 pm
Quote

I think it really depends on what they are doing. If it's standard of care, I say they don't need to be a sub-I. If it's study-specific, I say they do.

Click for thumbs down.0Click for thumbs up.0
Hightower Clinical / Note to File Podcast / Existential Dilettante / "Specialization is for insects"
Reply
Copyright
Pinnacle Themes