Author name: Sandra Galvin

Our community’s insights shape better trials. Three current studies are looking for your input – from sustainable trial design to understanding the participant experience – and each takes only minutes to join. GREEN-TRIALS: have your say on sustainable clinical trials The Erasmus+ GREEN-TRIALS project is developing training on running clinical trials in an environmentally sustainable way. […]

From protocol design to participant retention, the Network’s PhD scholars are shaping how tomorrow’s trials are run – three new publications showcase their work. Ellen Murphy PhD et al., (2026) BMJ Open: Retention in trials: a qualitative evidence synthesis of studies reporting participant reasons for trial non-completion  Marci Kay Livingston et al., (2026) Trials: Methodological

This year marks a decade of transformative funding from the Health Research Board (HRB), a milestone that we are honored to celebrate. To celebrate this journey, we have created two videos that showcase the achievements, collaborations, and people who have made this journey impactful. Since 2014, the HRB-Trials Methodology Research Network (HRB-TMRN) has achieved incredible

The HRB-TMRN is a proud Partner in the MRC-NIHR-Trials Methodology Research Partnership in the UK. This Partnership offers significant opportunity for trials methodology Researchers to develop and expand their collaborative personal networks. There are eight TMRP working groups which each specialise in specific areas relevant to trial methodology, with many active sub-groups. The main thematic

The Centre for Trials Research (CTR), Cardiff University is delighted to be working in partnership with the Health Research Board -Trials Methodology Research Network (HRB-TMRN) in Ireland, to launch the new Trial Governance Placement Scheme from March 2023. This is a fantastic opportunity for the CTR to forge a collaboration with international colleagues and to share

Written by Prof Shaun Treweek – Trial Forge, University of Aberdeen In 2022 we published an article called ‘Getting it wrong most of the time? Comparing trialists’ choice of primary outcome with what patients and health professionals want‘.  It looked at the outcomes selected in 44 breast cancer and kidney trials and asked patients and