Cargando…

Identifying trial recruitment uncertainties using a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership – the PRioRiTy (Prioritising Recruitment in Randomised Trials) study

BACKGROUND: Despite the problem of inadequate recruitment to randomised trials, there is little evidence to guide researchers on decisions about how people are effectively recruited to take part in trials. The PRioRiTy study aimed to identify and prioritise important unanswered trial recruitment que...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Healy, Patricia, Galvin, Sandra, Williamson, Paula R., Treweek, Shaun, Whiting, Caroline, Maeso, Beccy, Bray, Christopher, Brocklehurst, Peter, Moloney, Mary Clarke, Douiri, Abdel, Gamble, Carrol, Gardner, Heidi R., Mitchell, Derick, Stewart, Derek, Jordan, Joan, O’Donnell, Martin, Clarke, Mike, Pavitt, Sue H., Guegan, Eleanor Woodford, Blatch-Jones, Amanda, Smith, Valerie, Reay, Hannah, Devane, Declan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5831203/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29490702
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-018-2544-4
_version_ 1783303129370984448
author Healy, Patricia
Galvin, Sandra
Williamson, Paula R.
Treweek, Shaun
Whiting, Caroline
Maeso, Beccy
Bray, Christopher
Brocklehurst, Peter
Moloney, Mary Clarke
Douiri, Abdel
Gamble, Carrol
Gardner, Heidi R.
Mitchell, Derick
Stewart, Derek
Jordan, Joan
O’Donnell, Martin
Clarke, Mike
Pavitt, Sue H.
Guegan, Eleanor Woodford
Blatch-Jones, Amanda
Smith, Valerie
Reay, Hannah
Devane, Declan
author_facet Healy, Patricia
Galvin, Sandra
Williamson, Paula R.
Treweek, Shaun
Whiting, Caroline
Maeso, Beccy
Bray, Christopher
Brocklehurst, Peter
Moloney, Mary Clarke
Douiri, Abdel
Gamble, Carrol
Gardner, Heidi R.
Mitchell, Derick
Stewart, Derek
Jordan, Joan
O’Donnell, Martin
Clarke, Mike
Pavitt, Sue H.
Guegan, Eleanor Woodford
Blatch-Jones, Amanda
Smith, Valerie
Reay, Hannah
Devane, Declan
author_sort Healy, Patricia
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Despite the problem of inadequate recruitment to randomised trials, there is little evidence to guide researchers on decisions about how people are effectively recruited to take part in trials. The PRioRiTy study aimed to identify and prioritise important unanswered trial recruitment questions for research. The PRioRiTy study - Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) included members of the public approached to take part in a randomised trial or who have represented participants on randomised trial steering committees, health professionals and research staff with experience of recruiting to randomised trials, people who have designed, conducted, analysed or reported on randomised trials and people with experience of randomised trials methodology. METHODS: This partnership was aided by the James Lind Alliance and involved eight stages: (i) identifying a unique, relevant prioritisation area within trial methodology; (ii) establishing a steering group (iii) identifying and engaging with partners and stakeholders; (iv) formulating an initial list of uncertainties; (v) collating the uncertainties into research questions; (vi) confirming that the questions for research are a current recruitment challenge; (vii) shortlisting questions and (viii) final prioritisation through a face-to-face workshop. RESULTS: A total of 790 survey respondents yielded 1693 open-text answers to 6 questions, from which 1880 potential questions for research were identified. After merging duplicates, the number of questions was reduced to 496. Questions were combined further, and those that were submitted by fewer than 15 people and/or fewer than 6 of the 7 stakeholder groups were excluded from the next round of prioritisation resulting in 31 unique questions for research. All 31 questions were confirmed as being unanswered after checking relevant, up-to-date research evidence. The 10 highest priority questions were ranked at a face-to-face workshop. The number 1 ranked question was “How can randomised trials become part of routine care and best utilise current clinical care pathways?” The top 10 research questions can be viewed at www.priorityresearch.ie. CONCLUSION: The prioritised questions call for a collective focus on normalising trials as part of clinical care, enhancing communication, addressing barriers, enablers and motivators around participation and exploring greater public involvement in the research process.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5831203
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58312032018-03-05 Identifying trial recruitment uncertainties using a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership – the PRioRiTy (Prioritising Recruitment in Randomised Trials) study Healy, Patricia Galvin, Sandra Williamson, Paula R. Treweek, Shaun Whiting, Caroline Maeso, Beccy Bray, Christopher Brocklehurst, Peter Moloney, Mary Clarke Douiri, Abdel Gamble, Carrol Gardner, Heidi R. Mitchell, Derick Stewart, Derek Jordan, Joan O’Donnell, Martin Clarke, Mike Pavitt, Sue H. Guegan, Eleanor Woodford Blatch-Jones, Amanda Smith, Valerie Reay, Hannah Devane, Declan Trials Methodology BACKGROUND: Despite the problem of inadequate recruitment to randomised trials, there is little evidence to guide researchers on decisions about how people are effectively recruited to take part in trials. The PRioRiTy study aimed to identify and prioritise important unanswered trial recruitment questions for research. The PRioRiTy study - Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) included members of the public approached to take part in a randomised trial or who have represented participants on randomised trial steering committees, health professionals and research staff with experience of recruiting to randomised trials, people who have designed, conducted, analysed or reported on randomised trials and people with experience of randomised trials methodology. METHODS: This partnership was aided by the James Lind Alliance and involved eight stages: (i) identifying a unique, relevant prioritisation area within trial methodology; (ii) establishing a steering group (iii) identifying and engaging with partners and stakeholders; (iv) formulating an initial list of uncertainties; (v) collating the uncertainties into research questions; (vi) confirming that the questions for research are a current recruitment challenge; (vii) shortlisting questions and (viii) final prioritisation through a face-to-face workshop. RESULTS: A total of 790 survey respondents yielded 1693 open-text answers to 6 questions, from which 1880 potential questions for research were identified. After merging duplicates, the number of questions was reduced to 496. Questions were combined further, and those that were submitted by fewer than 15 people and/or fewer than 6 of the 7 stakeholder groups were excluded from the next round of prioritisation resulting in 31 unique questions for research. All 31 questions were confirmed as being unanswered after checking relevant, up-to-date research evidence. The 10 highest priority questions were ranked at a face-to-face workshop. The number 1 ranked question was “How can randomised trials become part of routine care and best utilise current clinical care pathways?” The top 10 research questions can be viewed at www.priorityresearch.ie. CONCLUSION: The prioritised questions call for a collective focus on normalising trials as part of clinical care, enhancing communication, addressing barriers, enablers and motivators around participation and exploring greater public involvement in the research process. BioMed Central 2018-03-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5831203/ /pubmed/29490702 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-018-2544-4 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open Access This 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 Methodology
Healy, Patricia
Galvin, Sandra
Williamson, Paula R.
Treweek, Shaun
Whiting, Caroline
Maeso, Beccy
Bray, Christopher
Brocklehurst, Peter
Moloney, Mary Clarke
Douiri, Abdel
Gamble, Carrol
Gardner, Heidi R.
Mitchell, Derick
Stewart, Derek
Jordan, Joan
O’Donnell, Martin
Clarke, Mike
Pavitt, Sue H.
Guegan, Eleanor Woodford
Blatch-Jones, Amanda
Smith, Valerie
Reay, Hannah
Devane, Declan
Identifying trial recruitment uncertainties using a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership – the PRioRiTy (Prioritising Recruitment in Randomised Trials) study
title Identifying trial recruitment uncertainties using a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership – the PRioRiTy (Prioritising Recruitment in Randomised Trials) study
title_full Identifying trial recruitment uncertainties using a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership – the PRioRiTy (Prioritising Recruitment in Randomised Trials) study
title_fullStr Identifying trial recruitment uncertainties using a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership – the PRioRiTy (Prioritising Recruitment in Randomised Trials) study
title_full_unstemmed Identifying trial recruitment uncertainties using a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership – the PRioRiTy (Prioritising Recruitment in Randomised Trials) study
title_short Identifying trial recruitment uncertainties using a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership – the PRioRiTy (Prioritising Recruitment in Randomised Trials) study
title_sort identifying trial recruitment uncertainties using a james lind alliance priority setting partnership – the priority (prioritising recruitment in randomised trials) study
topic Methodology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5831203/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29490702
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-018-2544-4
work_keys_str_mv AT healypatricia identifyingtrialrecruitmentuncertaintiesusingajameslindallianceprioritysettingpartnershipthepriorityprioritisingrecruitmentinrandomisedtrialsstudy
AT galvinsandra identifyingtrialrecruitmentuncertaintiesusingajameslindallianceprioritysettingpartnershipthepriorityprioritisingrecruitmentinrandomisedtrialsstudy
AT williamsonpaular identifyingtrialrecruitmentuncertaintiesusingajameslindallianceprioritysettingpartnershipthepriorityprioritisingrecruitmentinrandomisedtrialsstudy
AT treweekshaun identifyingtrialrecruitmentuncertaintiesusingajameslindallianceprioritysettingpartnershipthepriorityprioritisingrecruitmentinrandomisedtrialsstudy
AT whitingcaroline identifyingtrialrecruitmentuncertaintiesusingajameslindallianceprioritysettingpartnershipthepriorityprioritisingrecruitmentinrandomisedtrialsstudy
AT maesobeccy identifyingtrialrecruitmentuncertaintiesusingajameslindallianceprioritysettingpartnershipthepriorityprioritisingrecruitmentinrandomisedtrialsstudy
AT braychristopher identifyingtrialrecruitmentuncertaintiesusingajameslindallianceprioritysettingpartnershipthepriorityprioritisingrecruitmentinrandomisedtrialsstudy
AT brocklehurstpeter identifyingtrialrecruitmentuncertaintiesusingajameslindallianceprioritysettingpartnershipthepriorityprioritisingrecruitmentinrandomisedtrialsstudy
AT moloneymaryclarke identifyingtrialrecruitmentuncertaintiesusingajameslindallianceprioritysettingpartnershipthepriorityprioritisingrecruitmentinrandomisedtrialsstudy
AT douiriabdel identifyingtrialrecruitmentuncertaintiesusingajameslindallianceprioritysettingpartnershipthepriorityprioritisingrecruitmentinrandomisedtrialsstudy
AT gamblecarrol identifyingtrialrecruitmentuncertaintiesusingajameslindallianceprioritysettingpartnershipthepriorityprioritisingrecruitmentinrandomisedtrialsstudy
AT gardnerheidir identifyingtrialrecruitmentuncertaintiesusingajameslindallianceprioritysettingpartnershipthepriorityprioritisingrecruitmentinrandomisedtrialsstudy
AT mitchellderick identifyingtrialrecruitmentuncertaintiesusingajameslindallianceprioritysettingpartnershipthepriorityprioritisingrecruitmentinrandomisedtrialsstudy
AT stewartderek identifyingtrialrecruitmentuncertaintiesusingajameslindallianceprioritysettingpartnershipthepriorityprioritisingrecruitmentinrandomisedtrialsstudy
AT jordanjoan identifyingtrialrecruitmentuncertaintiesusingajameslindallianceprioritysettingpartnershipthepriorityprioritisingrecruitmentinrandomisedtrialsstudy
AT odonnellmartin identifyingtrialrecruitmentuncertaintiesusingajameslindallianceprioritysettingpartnershipthepriorityprioritisingrecruitmentinrandomisedtrialsstudy
AT clarkemike identifyingtrialrecruitmentuncertaintiesusingajameslindallianceprioritysettingpartnershipthepriorityprioritisingrecruitmentinrandomisedtrialsstudy
AT pavittsueh identifyingtrialrecruitmentuncertaintiesusingajameslindallianceprioritysettingpartnershipthepriorityprioritisingrecruitmentinrandomisedtrialsstudy
AT gueganeleanorwoodford identifyingtrialrecruitmentuncertaintiesusingajameslindallianceprioritysettingpartnershipthepriorityprioritisingrecruitmentinrandomisedtrialsstudy
AT blatchjonesamanda identifyingtrialrecruitmentuncertaintiesusingajameslindallianceprioritysettingpartnershipthepriorityprioritisingrecruitmentinrandomisedtrialsstudy
AT smithvalerie identifyingtrialrecruitmentuncertaintiesusingajameslindallianceprioritysettingpartnershipthepriorityprioritisingrecruitmentinrandomisedtrialsstudy
AT reayhannah identifyingtrialrecruitmentuncertaintiesusingajameslindallianceprioritysettingpartnershipthepriorityprioritisingrecruitmentinrandomisedtrialsstudy
AT devanedeclan identifyingtrialrecruitmentuncertaintiesusingajameslindallianceprioritysettingpartnershipthepriorityprioritisingrecruitmentinrandomisedtrialsstudy