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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gamble, Carrol, Dudley, Louise, Allam, Alison, Bell, Philip, Goodare, Heather, Hanley, Bec, Preston, Jennifer, Walker, Alison, Williamson, Paula, Young, Bridget
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