Cargando…

Improving site selection in clinical studies: a standardised, objective, multistep method and first experience results

INTRODUCTION: A considerable number of clinical studies experience delays, which result in increased duration and costs. In multicentre studies, patient recruitment is among the leading causes of delays. Poor site selection can result in low recruitment and bad data quality. Site selection is theref...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hurtado-Chong, Anahí, Joeris, Alexander, Hess, Denise, Blauth, Michael
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Open 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5734283/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28706090
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014796
_version_ 1783287031689904128
author Hurtado-Chong, Anahí
Joeris, Alexander
Hess, Denise
Blauth, Michael
author_facet Hurtado-Chong, Anahí
Joeris, Alexander
Hess, Denise
Blauth, Michael
author_sort Hurtado-Chong, Anahí
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: A considerable number of clinical studies experience delays, which result in increased duration and costs. In multicentre studies, patient recruitment is among the leading causes of delays. Poor site selection can result in low recruitment and bad data quality. Site selection is therefore crucial for study quality and completion, but currently no specific guidelines are available. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Selection of sites adequate to participate in a prospective multicentre cohort study was performed through an open call using a newly developed objective multistep approach. The method is based on use of a network, definition of objective criteria and a systematic screening process. ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE OF THE METHOD AT WORK: Out of 266 interested sites, 24 were shortlisted and finally 12 sites were selected to participate in the study. The steps in the process included an open call through a network, use of selection questionnaires tailored to the study, evaluation of responses using objective criteria and scripted telephone interviews. At each step, the number of candidate sites was quickly reduced leaving only the most promising candidates. Recruitment and quality of data went according to expectations in spite of the contracting problems faced with some sites. CONCLUSION: The results of our first experience with a standardised and objective method of site selection are encouraging. The site selection method described here can serve as a guideline for other researchers performing multicentre studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02297581.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5734283
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BMJ Open
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57342832017-12-20 Improving site selection in clinical studies: a standardised, objective, multistep method and first experience results Hurtado-Chong, Anahí Joeris, Alexander Hess, Denise Blauth, Michael BMJ Open Research Methods INTRODUCTION: A considerable number of clinical studies experience delays, which result in increased duration and costs. In multicentre studies, patient recruitment is among the leading causes of delays. Poor site selection can result in low recruitment and bad data quality. Site selection is therefore crucial for study quality and completion, but currently no specific guidelines are available. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Selection of sites adequate to participate in a prospective multicentre cohort study was performed through an open call using a newly developed objective multistep approach. The method is based on use of a network, definition of objective criteria and a systematic screening process. ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE OF THE METHOD AT WORK: Out of 266 interested sites, 24 were shortlisted and finally 12 sites were selected to participate in the study. The steps in the process included an open call through a network, use of selection questionnaires tailored to the study, evaluation of responses using objective criteria and scripted telephone interviews. At each step, the number of candidate sites was quickly reduced leaving only the most promising candidates. Recruitment and quality of data went according to expectations in spite of the contracting problems faced with some sites. CONCLUSION: The results of our first experience with a standardised and objective method of site selection are encouraging. The site selection method described here can serve as a guideline for other researchers performing multicentre studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02297581. BMJ Open 2017-07-12 /pmc/articles/PMC5734283/ /pubmed/28706090 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014796 Text en © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted. 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 Research Methods
Hurtado-Chong, Anahí
Joeris, Alexander
Hess, Denise
Blauth, Michael
Improving site selection in clinical studies: a standardised, objective, multistep method and first experience results
title Improving site selection in clinical studies: a standardised, objective, multistep method and first experience results
title_full Improving site selection in clinical studies: a standardised, objective, multistep method and first experience results
title_fullStr Improving site selection in clinical studies: a standardised, objective, multistep method and first experience results
title_full_unstemmed Improving site selection in clinical studies: a standardised, objective, multistep method and first experience results
title_short Improving site selection in clinical studies: a standardised, objective, multistep method and first experience results
title_sort improving site selection in clinical studies: a standardised, objective, multistep method and first experience results
topic Research Methods
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5734283/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28706090
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014796
work_keys_str_mv AT hurtadochonganahi improvingsiteselectioninclinicalstudiesastandardisedobjectivemultistepmethodandfirstexperienceresults
AT joerisalexander improvingsiteselectioninclinicalstudiesastandardisedobjectivemultistepmethodandfirstexperienceresults
AT hessdenise improvingsiteselectioninclinicalstudiesastandardisedobjectivemultistepmethodandfirstexperienceresults
AT blauthmichael improvingsiteselectioninclinicalstudiesastandardisedobjectivemultistepmethodandfirstexperienceresults