Cargando…
The trials methodological research agenda: results from a priority setting exercise
BACKGROUND: Research into the methods used in the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of clinical trials is essential to ensure that effective methods are available and that clinical decisions made using results from trials are based on the best available evidence, which is reliable and robust....
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3904160/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24456928 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-15-32 |
_version_ | 1782301190593183744 |
---|---|
author | Tudur Smith, Catrin Hickey, Helen Clarke, Mike Blazeby, Jane Williamson, Paula |
author_facet | Tudur Smith, Catrin Hickey, Helen Clarke, Mike Blazeby, Jane Williamson, Paula |
author_sort | Tudur Smith, Catrin |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Research into the methods used in the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of clinical trials is essential to ensure that effective methods are available and that clinical decisions made using results from trials are based on the best available evidence, which is reliable and robust. METHODS: An on-line Delphi survey of 48 UK Clinical Research Collaboration registered Clinical Trials Units (CTUs) was undertaken. During round one, CTU Directors were asked to identify important topics that require methodological research. During round two, their opinion about the level of importance of each topic was recorded, and during round three, they were asked to review the group’s average opinion and revise their previous opinion if appropriate. Direct reminders were sent to maximise the number of responses at each round. Results are summarised using descriptive methods. RESULTS: Forty one (85%) CTU Directors responded to at least one round of the Delphi process: 25 (52%) responded in round one, 32 (67%) responded in round two, 24 (50%) responded in round three. There were only 12 (25%) who responded to all three rounds and 18 (38%) who responded to both rounds two and three. Consensus was achieved amongst CTU Directors that the top three priorities for trials methodological research were ‘Research into methods to boost recruitment in trials’ (considered the highest priority), ‘Methods to minimise attrition’ and ‘Choosing appropriate outcomes to measure’. Fifty other topics were included in the list of priorities and consensus was reached that two topics, ‘Radiotherapy study designs’ and ‘Low carbon trials’, were not priorities. CONCLUSIONS: This priority setting exercise has identified the research topics felt to be most important to the key stakeholder group of Directors of UKCRC registered CTUs. The use of robust methodology to identify these priorities will help ensure that this work informs the trials methodological research agenda, with a focus on topics that will have most impact and relevance. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3904160 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-39041602014-01-29 The trials methodological research agenda: results from a priority setting exercise Tudur Smith, Catrin Hickey, Helen Clarke, Mike Blazeby, Jane Williamson, Paula Trials Research BACKGROUND: Research into the methods used in the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of clinical trials is essential to ensure that effective methods are available and that clinical decisions made using results from trials are based on the best available evidence, which is reliable and robust. METHODS: An on-line Delphi survey of 48 UK Clinical Research Collaboration registered Clinical Trials Units (CTUs) was undertaken. During round one, CTU Directors were asked to identify important topics that require methodological research. During round two, their opinion about the level of importance of each topic was recorded, and during round three, they were asked to review the group’s average opinion and revise their previous opinion if appropriate. Direct reminders were sent to maximise the number of responses at each round. Results are summarised using descriptive methods. RESULTS: Forty one (85%) CTU Directors responded to at least one round of the Delphi process: 25 (52%) responded in round one, 32 (67%) responded in round two, 24 (50%) responded in round three. There were only 12 (25%) who responded to all three rounds and 18 (38%) who responded to both rounds two and three. Consensus was achieved amongst CTU Directors that the top three priorities for trials methodological research were ‘Research into methods to boost recruitment in trials’ (considered the highest priority), ‘Methods to minimise attrition’ and ‘Choosing appropriate outcomes to measure’. Fifty other topics were included in the list of priorities and consensus was reached that two topics, ‘Radiotherapy study designs’ and ‘Low carbon trials’, were not priorities. CONCLUSIONS: This priority setting exercise has identified the research topics felt to be most important to the key stakeholder group of Directors of UKCRC registered CTUs. The use of robust methodology to identify these priorities will help ensure that this work informs the trials methodological research agenda, with a focus on topics that will have most impact and relevance. BioMed Central 2014-01-23 /pmc/articles/PMC3904160/ /pubmed/24456928 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-15-32 Text en Copyright © 2014 Tudur Smith et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Tudur Smith, Catrin Hickey, Helen Clarke, Mike Blazeby, Jane Williamson, Paula The trials methodological research agenda: results from a priority setting exercise |
title | The trials methodological research agenda: results from a priority setting exercise |
title_full | The trials methodological research agenda: results from a priority setting exercise |
title_fullStr | The trials methodological research agenda: results from a priority setting exercise |
title_full_unstemmed | The trials methodological research agenda: results from a priority setting exercise |
title_short | The trials methodological research agenda: results from a priority setting exercise |
title_sort | trials methodological research agenda: results from a priority setting exercise |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3904160/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24456928 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-15-32 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tudursmithcatrin thetrialsmethodologicalresearchagendaresultsfromaprioritysettingexercise AT hickeyhelen thetrialsmethodologicalresearchagendaresultsfromaprioritysettingexercise AT clarkemike thetrialsmethodologicalresearchagendaresultsfromaprioritysettingexercise AT blazebyjane thetrialsmethodologicalresearchagendaresultsfromaprioritysettingexercise AT williamsonpaula thetrialsmethodologicalresearchagendaresultsfromaprioritysettingexercise AT tudursmithcatrin trialsmethodologicalresearchagendaresultsfromaprioritysettingexercise AT hickeyhelen trialsmethodologicalresearchagendaresultsfromaprioritysettingexercise AT clarkemike trialsmethodologicalresearchagendaresultsfromaprioritysettingexercise AT blazebyjane trialsmethodologicalresearchagendaresultsfromaprioritysettingexercise AT williamsonpaula trialsmethodologicalresearchagendaresultsfromaprioritysettingexercise |