Cargando…
Patient and public involvement in the early stages of clinical trial development: a systematic cohort investigation
BACKGROUND: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are considered particularly likely to benefit from patient and public involvement (PPI). Decisions made by professional researchers at the outset may go on to have a significant impact on the potential for PPI contributions. OBJECTIVE: To increase know...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4120322/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25056972 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005234 |
_version_ | 1782329067466391552 |
---|---|
author | Gamble, Carrol Dudley, Louise Allam, Alison Bell, Philip Goodare, Heather Hanley, Bec Preston, Jennifer Walker, Alison Williamson, Paula Young, Bridget |
author_facet | Gamble, Carrol Dudley, Louise Allam, Alison Bell, Philip Goodare, Heather Hanley, Bec Preston, Jennifer Walker, Alison Williamson, Paula Young, Bridget |
author_sort | Gamble, Carrol |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are considered particularly likely to benefit from patient and public involvement (PPI). Decisions made by professional researchers at the outset may go on to have a significant impact on the potential for PPI contributions. OBJECTIVE: To increase knowledge of PPI within the early development of RCTs by systematically describing the reported level, nature and acceptability of proposed PPI to the funders. METHODS: Documentation from the outline application process for all RCTs that received funding from the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme 2006–2010 was requested. For each application, data were extracted on trial characteristics, references to PPI in the development of the outline application and funding Board feedback, and plans for PPI in the full application and after the trial was funded. RESULTS: 110 applications were eligible with outline applications available for 90 (82%). The cohort covered a wide range of interventions and conditions. 54% (49/90) provided some information about PPI. 26 (28.9%) indicated PPI within the development of the outline application itself; 32 (35.6%) planned involvement in the full application and 43 (48%) once the trial was funded. Recruitment at diagnosis and surgical interventions were less likely to describe PPI. Blinded trials and trials in which participants may receive placebo only, more frequently described PPI activity. The HTA commissioning Board feedback rarely referred to PPI. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporation of PPI within the development of the outline application or specification of plans for future involvement was low. Funder requests for applicants to provide information on PPI and justification for its absence should be welcomed but further research is needed to identify the impact of this on its contributions to research. Comments on PPI by reviewers should be directional rather than state that an increase is required. Challenges facing applicants in initiating PPI prior to funding need to be addressed. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4120322 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-41203222014-08-05 Patient and public involvement in the early stages of clinical trial development: a systematic cohort investigation Gamble, Carrol Dudley, Louise Allam, Alison Bell, Philip Goodare, Heather Hanley, Bec Preston, Jennifer Walker, Alison Williamson, Paula Young, Bridget BMJ Open Health Services Research BACKGROUND: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are considered particularly likely to benefit from patient and public involvement (PPI). Decisions made by professional researchers at the outset may go on to have a significant impact on the potential for PPI contributions. OBJECTIVE: To increase knowledge of PPI within the early development of RCTs by systematically describing the reported level, nature and acceptability of proposed PPI to the funders. METHODS: Documentation from the outline application process for all RCTs that received funding from the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme 2006–2010 was requested. For each application, data were extracted on trial characteristics, references to PPI in the development of the outline application and funding Board feedback, and plans for PPI in the full application and after the trial was funded. RESULTS: 110 applications were eligible with outline applications available for 90 (82%). The cohort covered a wide range of interventions and conditions. 54% (49/90) provided some information about PPI. 26 (28.9%) indicated PPI within the development of the outline application itself; 32 (35.6%) planned involvement in the full application and 43 (48%) once the trial was funded. Recruitment at diagnosis and surgical interventions were less likely to describe PPI. Blinded trials and trials in which participants may receive placebo only, more frequently described PPI activity. The HTA commissioning Board feedback rarely referred to PPI. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporation of PPI within the development of the outline application or specification of plans for future involvement was low. Funder requests for applicants to provide information on PPI and justification for its absence should be welcomed but further research is needed to identify the impact of this on its contributions to research. Comments on PPI by reviewers should be directional rather than state that an increase is required. Challenges facing applicants in initiating PPI prior to funding need to be addressed. BMJ Publishing Group 2014-07-22 /pmc/articles/PMC4120322/ /pubmed/25056972 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005234 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Health Services Research Gamble, Carrol Dudley, Louise Allam, Alison Bell, Philip Goodare, Heather Hanley, Bec Preston, Jennifer Walker, Alison Williamson, Paula Young, Bridget Patient and public involvement in the early stages of clinical trial development: a systematic cohort investigation |
title | Patient and public involvement in the early stages of clinical trial development: a systematic cohort investigation |
title_full | Patient and public involvement in the early stages of clinical trial development: a systematic cohort investigation |
title_fullStr | Patient and public involvement in the early stages of clinical trial development: a systematic cohort investigation |
title_full_unstemmed | Patient and public involvement in the early stages of clinical trial development: a systematic cohort investigation |
title_short | Patient and public involvement in the early stages of clinical trial development: a systematic cohort investigation |
title_sort | patient and public involvement in the early stages of clinical trial development: a systematic cohort investigation |
topic | Health Services Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4120322/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25056972 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005234 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gamblecarrol patientandpublicinvolvementintheearlystagesofclinicaltrialdevelopmentasystematiccohortinvestigation AT dudleylouise patientandpublicinvolvementintheearlystagesofclinicaltrialdevelopmentasystematiccohortinvestigation AT allamalison patientandpublicinvolvementintheearlystagesofclinicaltrialdevelopmentasystematiccohortinvestigation AT bellphilip patientandpublicinvolvementintheearlystagesofclinicaltrialdevelopmentasystematiccohortinvestigation AT goodareheather patientandpublicinvolvementintheearlystagesofclinicaltrialdevelopmentasystematiccohortinvestigation AT hanleybec patientandpublicinvolvementintheearlystagesofclinicaltrialdevelopmentasystematiccohortinvestigation AT prestonjennifer patientandpublicinvolvementintheearlystagesofclinicaltrialdevelopmentasystematiccohortinvestigation AT walkeralison patientandpublicinvolvementintheearlystagesofclinicaltrialdevelopmentasystematiccohortinvestigation AT williamsonpaula patientandpublicinvolvementintheearlystagesofclinicaltrialdevelopmentasystematiccohortinvestigation AT youngbridget patientandpublicinvolvementintheearlystagesofclinicaltrialdevelopmentasystematiccohortinvestigation |