Cargando…

Development process of a consensus-driven CONSORT extension for randomised trials using an adaptive design

BACKGROUND: Adequate reporting of adaptive designs (ADs) maximises their potential benefits in the conduct of clinical trials. Transparent reporting can help address some obstacles and concerns relating to the use of ADs. Currently, there are deficiencies in the reporting of AD trials. To overcome t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dimairo, Munyaradzi, Coates, Elizabeth, Pallmann, Philip, Todd, Susan, Julious, Steven A., Jaki, Thomas, Wason, James, Mander, Adrian P., Weir, Christopher J., Koenig, Franz, Walton, Marc K., Biggs, Katie, Nicholl, Jon, Hamasaki, Toshimitsu, Proschan, Michael A., Scott, John A., Ando, Yuki, Hind, Daniel, Altman, Douglas G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6238302/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30442137
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-018-1196-2
_version_ 1783371347739541504
author Dimairo, Munyaradzi
Coates, Elizabeth
Pallmann, Philip
Todd, Susan
Julious, Steven A.
Jaki, Thomas
Wason, James
Mander, Adrian P.
Weir, Christopher J.
Koenig, Franz
Walton, Marc K.
Biggs, Katie
Nicholl, Jon
Hamasaki, Toshimitsu
Proschan, Michael A.
Scott, John A.
Ando, Yuki
Hind, Daniel
Altman, Douglas G.
author_facet Dimairo, Munyaradzi
Coates, Elizabeth
Pallmann, Philip
Todd, Susan
Julious, Steven A.
Jaki, Thomas
Wason, James
Mander, Adrian P.
Weir, Christopher J.
Koenig, Franz
Walton, Marc K.
Biggs, Katie
Nicholl, Jon
Hamasaki, Toshimitsu
Proschan, Michael A.
Scott, John A.
Ando, Yuki
Hind, Daniel
Altman, Douglas G.
author_sort Dimairo, Munyaradzi
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Adequate reporting of adaptive designs (ADs) maximises their potential benefits in the conduct of clinical trials. Transparent reporting can help address some obstacles and concerns relating to the use of ADs. Currently, there are deficiencies in the reporting of AD trials. To overcome this, we have developed a consensus-driven extension to the CONSORT statement for randomised trials using an AD. This paper describes the processes and methods used to develop this extension rather than detailed explanation of the guideline. METHODS: We developed the guideline in seven overlapping stages: 1. Building on prior research to inform the need for a guideline; 2. A scoping literature review to inform future stages; 3. Drafting the first checklist version involving an External Expert Panel; 4. A two-round Delphi process involving international, multidisciplinary, and cross-sector key stakeholders; 5. A consensus meeting to advise which reporting items to retain through voting, and to discuss the structure of what to include in the supporting explanation and elaboration (E&E) document; 6. Refining and finalising the checklist; and 7. Writing-up and dissemination of the E&E document. The CONSORT Executive Group oversaw the entire development process. RESULTS: Delphi survey response rates were 94/143 (66%), 114/156 (73%), and 79/143 (55%) in rounds 1, 2, and across both rounds, respectively. Twenty-seven delegates from Europe, the USA, and Asia attended the consensus meeting. The main checklist has seven new and nine modified items and six unchanged items with expanded E&E text to clarify further considerations for ADs. The abstract checklist has one new and one modified item together with an unchanged item with expanded E&E text. The E&E document will describe the scope of the guideline, the definition of an AD, and some types of ADs and trial adaptations and explain each reporting item in detail including case studies. CONCLUSIONS: We hope that making the development processes, methods, and all supporting information that aided decision-making transparent will enhance the acceptability and quick uptake of the guideline. This will also help other groups when developing similar CONSORT extensions. The guideline is applicable to all randomised trials with an AD and contains minimum reporting requirements. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12916-018-1196-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6238302
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62383022018-11-23 Development process of a consensus-driven CONSORT extension for randomised trials using an adaptive design Dimairo, Munyaradzi Coates, Elizabeth Pallmann, Philip Todd, Susan Julious, Steven A. Jaki, Thomas Wason, James Mander, Adrian P. Weir, Christopher J. Koenig, Franz Walton, Marc K. Biggs, Katie Nicholl, Jon Hamasaki, Toshimitsu Proschan, Michael A. Scott, John A. Ando, Yuki Hind, Daniel Altman, Douglas G. BMC Med Guideline BACKGROUND: Adequate reporting of adaptive designs (ADs) maximises their potential benefits in the conduct of clinical trials. Transparent reporting can help address some obstacles and concerns relating to the use of ADs. Currently, there are deficiencies in the reporting of AD trials. To overcome this, we have developed a consensus-driven extension to the CONSORT statement for randomised trials using an AD. This paper describes the processes and methods used to develop this extension rather than detailed explanation of the guideline. METHODS: We developed the guideline in seven overlapping stages: 1. Building on prior research to inform the need for a guideline; 2. A scoping literature review to inform future stages; 3. Drafting the first checklist version involving an External Expert Panel; 4. A two-round Delphi process involving international, multidisciplinary, and cross-sector key stakeholders; 5. A consensus meeting to advise which reporting items to retain through voting, and to discuss the structure of what to include in the supporting explanation and elaboration (E&E) document; 6. Refining and finalising the checklist; and 7. Writing-up and dissemination of the E&E document. The CONSORT Executive Group oversaw the entire development process. RESULTS: Delphi survey response rates were 94/143 (66%), 114/156 (73%), and 79/143 (55%) in rounds 1, 2, and across both rounds, respectively. Twenty-seven delegates from Europe, the USA, and Asia attended the consensus meeting. The main checklist has seven new and nine modified items and six unchanged items with expanded E&E text to clarify further considerations for ADs. The abstract checklist has one new and one modified item together with an unchanged item with expanded E&E text. The E&E document will describe the scope of the guideline, the definition of an AD, and some types of ADs and trial adaptations and explain each reporting item in detail including case studies. CONCLUSIONS: We hope that making the development processes, methods, and all supporting information that aided decision-making transparent will enhance the acceptability and quick uptake of the guideline. This will also help other groups when developing similar CONSORT extensions. The guideline is applicable to all randomised trials with an AD and contains minimum reporting requirements. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12916-018-1196-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-11-16 /pmc/articles/PMC6238302/ /pubmed/30442137 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-018-1196-2 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 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 Guideline
Dimairo, Munyaradzi
Coates, Elizabeth
Pallmann, Philip
Todd, Susan
Julious, Steven A.
Jaki, Thomas
Wason, James
Mander, Adrian P.
Weir, Christopher J.
Koenig, Franz
Walton, Marc K.
Biggs, Katie
Nicholl, Jon
Hamasaki, Toshimitsu
Proschan, Michael A.
Scott, John A.
Ando, Yuki
Hind, Daniel
Altman, Douglas G.
Development process of a consensus-driven CONSORT extension for randomised trials using an adaptive design
title Development process of a consensus-driven CONSORT extension for randomised trials using an adaptive design
title_full Development process of a consensus-driven CONSORT extension for randomised trials using an adaptive design
title_fullStr Development process of a consensus-driven CONSORT extension for randomised trials using an adaptive design
title_full_unstemmed Development process of a consensus-driven CONSORT extension for randomised trials using an adaptive design
title_short Development process of a consensus-driven CONSORT extension for randomised trials using an adaptive design
title_sort development process of a consensus-driven consort extension for randomised trials using an adaptive design
topic Guideline
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6238302/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30442137
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-018-1196-2
work_keys_str_mv AT dimairomunyaradzi developmentprocessofaconsensusdrivenconsortextensionforrandomisedtrialsusinganadaptivedesign
AT coateselizabeth developmentprocessofaconsensusdrivenconsortextensionforrandomisedtrialsusinganadaptivedesign
AT pallmannphilip developmentprocessofaconsensusdrivenconsortextensionforrandomisedtrialsusinganadaptivedesign
AT toddsusan developmentprocessofaconsensusdrivenconsortextensionforrandomisedtrialsusinganadaptivedesign
AT juliousstevena developmentprocessofaconsensusdrivenconsortextensionforrandomisedtrialsusinganadaptivedesign
AT jakithomas developmentprocessofaconsensusdrivenconsortextensionforrandomisedtrialsusinganadaptivedesign
AT wasonjames developmentprocessofaconsensusdrivenconsortextensionforrandomisedtrialsusinganadaptivedesign
AT manderadrianp developmentprocessofaconsensusdrivenconsortextensionforrandomisedtrialsusinganadaptivedesign
AT weirchristopherj developmentprocessofaconsensusdrivenconsortextensionforrandomisedtrialsusinganadaptivedesign
AT koenigfranz developmentprocessofaconsensusdrivenconsortextensionforrandomisedtrialsusinganadaptivedesign
AT waltonmarck developmentprocessofaconsensusdrivenconsortextensionforrandomisedtrialsusinganadaptivedesign
AT biggskatie developmentprocessofaconsensusdrivenconsortextensionforrandomisedtrialsusinganadaptivedesign
AT nicholljon developmentprocessofaconsensusdrivenconsortextensionforrandomisedtrialsusinganadaptivedesign
AT hamasakitoshimitsu developmentprocessofaconsensusdrivenconsortextensionforrandomisedtrialsusinganadaptivedesign
AT proschanmichaela developmentprocessofaconsensusdrivenconsortextensionforrandomisedtrialsusinganadaptivedesign
AT scottjohna developmentprocessofaconsensusdrivenconsortextensionforrandomisedtrialsusinganadaptivedesign
AT andoyuki developmentprocessofaconsensusdrivenconsortextensionforrandomisedtrialsusinganadaptivedesign
AT hinddaniel developmentprocessofaconsensusdrivenconsortextensionforrandomisedtrialsusinganadaptivedesign
AT altmandouglasg developmentprocessofaconsensusdrivenconsortextensionforrandomisedtrialsusinganadaptivedesign