Cargando…
A case study of SMART attributes: a qualitative assessment of generalizability, retention rate, and trial quality
BACKGROUND: Personalizing medical care is becoming increasingly popular, particularly mental health care. There is growing interest in formalizing medical decision making based on evolving patient symptoms in an evidence-based manner. To determine optimal sequencing of treatments, the sequences them...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4894372/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27180047 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-016-1368-3 |
_version_ | 1782435663232106496 |
---|---|
author | Moodie, Erica E. M. Karran, James C. Shortreed, Susan M. |
author_facet | Moodie, Erica E. M. Karran, James C. Shortreed, Susan M. |
author_sort | Moodie, Erica E. M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Personalizing medical care is becoming increasingly popular, particularly mental health care. There is growing interest in formalizing medical decision making based on evolving patient symptoms in an evidence-based manner. To determine optimal sequencing of treatments, the sequences themselves must be studied; this may be accomplished by using a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART). It has been hypothesized that SMART studies may improve participant retention and generalizability. METHODS: We examine the hypotheses that SMART studies are more generalizable and have better retention than traditional randomized clinical trials via a case study of a SMART study of antipsychotic medications. We considered the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) schizophrenia study, comparing the trial participant characteristics and overall retention to those of comparable trials found via a review of all related trials conducted from 2000 onwards. RESULTS: A MEDLINE search returned 6435 results for primary screening; ultimately, 48 distinct trials were retained for analysis. The study population in CATIE was similar to, although perhaps less symptomatic than, the study populations of traditional randomized clinical trials (RCTs), suggesting no large gains in generalizability despite the pragmatic nature of the trial. However, CATIE did see good month-by-month retention. CONCLUSIONS: SMARTs offer the possibility of studying treatment sequences in a way that a series of traditional RCTs cannot. SMARTs may offer improved retention; however, this case study did not find evidence to suggest greater generalizability using this trial design. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00014001. Registered on 6 April 2001. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-016-1368-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4894372 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-48943722016-06-07 A case study of SMART attributes: a qualitative assessment of generalizability, retention rate, and trial quality Moodie, Erica E. M. Karran, James C. Shortreed, Susan M. Trials Research BACKGROUND: Personalizing medical care is becoming increasingly popular, particularly mental health care. There is growing interest in formalizing medical decision making based on evolving patient symptoms in an evidence-based manner. To determine optimal sequencing of treatments, the sequences themselves must be studied; this may be accomplished by using a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART). It has been hypothesized that SMART studies may improve participant retention and generalizability. METHODS: We examine the hypotheses that SMART studies are more generalizable and have better retention than traditional randomized clinical trials via a case study of a SMART study of antipsychotic medications. We considered the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) schizophrenia study, comparing the trial participant characteristics and overall retention to those of comparable trials found via a review of all related trials conducted from 2000 onwards. RESULTS: A MEDLINE search returned 6435 results for primary screening; ultimately, 48 distinct trials were retained for analysis. The study population in CATIE was similar to, although perhaps less symptomatic than, the study populations of traditional randomized clinical trials (RCTs), suggesting no large gains in generalizability despite the pragmatic nature of the trial. However, CATIE did see good month-by-month retention. CONCLUSIONS: SMARTs offer the possibility of studying treatment sequences in a way that a series of traditional RCTs cannot. SMARTs may offer improved retention; however, this case study did not find evidence to suggest greater generalizability using this trial design. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00014001. Registered on 6 April 2001. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-016-1368-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-05-14 /pmc/articles/PMC4894372/ /pubmed/27180047 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-016-1368-3 Text en © Moodie et al. 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. 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 Moodie, Erica E. M. Karran, James C. Shortreed, Susan M. A case study of SMART attributes: a qualitative assessment of generalizability, retention rate, and trial quality |
title | A case study of SMART attributes: a qualitative assessment of generalizability, retention rate, and trial quality |
title_full | A case study of SMART attributes: a qualitative assessment of generalizability, retention rate, and trial quality |
title_fullStr | A case study of SMART attributes: a qualitative assessment of generalizability, retention rate, and trial quality |
title_full_unstemmed | A case study of SMART attributes: a qualitative assessment of generalizability, retention rate, and trial quality |
title_short | A case study of SMART attributes: a qualitative assessment of generalizability, retention rate, and trial quality |
title_sort | case study of smart attributes: a qualitative assessment of generalizability, retention rate, and trial quality |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4894372/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27180047 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-016-1368-3 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT moodieericaem acasestudyofsmartattributesaqualitativeassessmentofgeneralizabilityretentionrateandtrialquality AT karranjamesc acasestudyofsmartattributesaqualitativeassessmentofgeneralizabilityretentionrateandtrialquality AT shortreedsusanm acasestudyofsmartattributesaqualitativeassessmentofgeneralizabilityretentionrateandtrialquality AT moodieericaem casestudyofsmartattributesaqualitativeassessmentofgeneralizabilityretentionrateandtrialquality AT karranjamesc casestudyofsmartattributesaqualitativeassessmentofgeneralizabilityretentionrateandtrialquality AT shortreedsusanm casestudyofsmartattributesaqualitativeassessmentofgeneralizabilityretentionrateandtrialquality |