Cargando…

Stakeholder views regarding ethical issues in the design and conduct of pragmatic trials: study protocol

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trial (RCT) trial designs exist on an explanatory-pragmatic spectrum, depending on the degree to which a study aims to address a question of efficacy or effectiveness. As conceptualized by Schwartz and Lellouch in 1967, an explanatory approach to trial design emphas...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nicholls, Stuart G., Carroll, Kelly, Brehaut, Jamie, Weijer, Charles, Hey, Spencer Phillips, Goldstein, Cory E., Zwarenstein, Merrick, Graham, Ian D., McKenzie, Joanne E., McIntyre, Lauralyn, Jairath, Vipul, Campbell, Marion K., Grimshaw, Jeremy M., Fergusson, Dean A., Taljaard, Monica
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6247737/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30458809
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-018-0332-z
_version_ 1783372544230817792
author Nicholls, Stuart G.
Carroll, Kelly
Brehaut, Jamie
Weijer, Charles
Hey, Spencer Phillips
Goldstein, Cory E.
Zwarenstein, Merrick
Graham, Ian D.
McKenzie, Joanne E.
McIntyre, Lauralyn
Jairath, Vipul
Campbell, Marion K.
Grimshaw, Jeremy M.
Fergusson, Dean A.
Taljaard, Monica
author_facet Nicholls, Stuart G.
Carroll, Kelly
Brehaut, Jamie
Weijer, Charles
Hey, Spencer Phillips
Goldstein, Cory E.
Zwarenstein, Merrick
Graham, Ian D.
McKenzie, Joanne E.
McIntyre, Lauralyn
Jairath, Vipul
Campbell, Marion K.
Grimshaw, Jeremy M.
Fergusson, Dean A.
Taljaard, Monica
author_sort Nicholls, Stuart G.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trial (RCT) trial designs exist on an explanatory-pragmatic spectrum, depending on the degree to which a study aims to address a question of efficacy or effectiveness. As conceptualized by Schwartz and Lellouch in 1967, an explanatory approach to trial design emphasizes hypothesis testing about the mechanisms of action of treatments under ideal conditions (efficacy), whereas a pragmatic approach emphasizes testing effectiveness of two or more available treatments in real-world conditions. Interest in, and the number of, pragmatic trials has grown substantially in recent years, with increased recognition by funders and stakeholders worldwide of the need for credible evidence to inform clinical decision-making. This increase has been accompanied by the onset of learning healthcare systems, as well as an increasing focus on patient-oriented research. However, pragmatic trials have ethical challenges that have not yet been identified or adequately characterized. The present study aims to explore the views of key stakeholders with respect to ethical issues raised by the design and conduct of pragmatic trials. It is embedded within a large, four-year project that seeks to develop guidance for the ethical design and conduct of pragmatic trials. As a first step, this study will address important gaps in the current empirical literature with respect to identifying a comprehensive range of ethical issues arising from the design and conduct of pragmatic trials. By opening up a broad range of topics for consideration within our parallel ethical analysis, we will extend the current debate, which has largely emphasized issues of consent, to the range of ethical considerations that may flow from specific design choices. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders (e.g. trialists, methodologists, lay members of study teams, bioethicists, and research ethics committee members), across multiple jurisdictions, identified based on their known experience and/or expertise with pragmatic trials. DISCUSSION: We expect that the study outputs will be of interest to a wide range of knowledge users including trialists, ethicists, research ethics committees, journal editors, regulators, healthcare policymakers, research funders and patient groups. All publications will adhere to the Tri-Agency Open Access Policy on Publications. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12910-018-0332-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6247737
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62477372018-11-26 Stakeholder views regarding ethical issues in the design and conduct of pragmatic trials: study protocol Nicholls, Stuart G. Carroll, Kelly Brehaut, Jamie Weijer, Charles Hey, Spencer Phillips Goldstein, Cory E. Zwarenstein, Merrick Graham, Ian D. McKenzie, Joanne E. McIntyre, Lauralyn Jairath, Vipul Campbell, Marion K. Grimshaw, Jeremy M. Fergusson, Dean A. Taljaard, Monica BMC Med Ethics Study Protocol BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trial (RCT) trial designs exist on an explanatory-pragmatic spectrum, depending on the degree to which a study aims to address a question of efficacy or effectiveness. As conceptualized by Schwartz and Lellouch in 1967, an explanatory approach to trial design emphasizes hypothesis testing about the mechanisms of action of treatments under ideal conditions (efficacy), whereas a pragmatic approach emphasizes testing effectiveness of two or more available treatments in real-world conditions. Interest in, and the number of, pragmatic trials has grown substantially in recent years, with increased recognition by funders and stakeholders worldwide of the need for credible evidence to inform clinical decision-making. This increase has been accompanied by the onset of learning healthcare systems, as well as an increasing focus on patient-oriented research. However, pragmatic trials have ethical challenges that have not yet been identified or adequately characterized. The present study aims to explore the views of key stakeholders with respect to ethical issues raised by the design and conduct of pragmatic trials. It is embedded within a large, four-year project that seeks to develop guidance for the ethical design and conduct of pragmatic trials. As a first step, this study will address important gaps in the current empirical literature with respect to identifying a comprehensive range of ethical issues arising from the design and conduct of pragmatic trials. By opening up a broad range of topics for consideration within our parallel ethical analysis, we will extend the current debate, which has largely emphasized issues of consent, to the range of ethical considerations that may flow from specific design choices. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders (e.g. trialists, methodologists, lay members of study teams, bioethicists, and research ethics committee members), across multiple jurisdictions, identified based on their known experience and/or expertise with pragmatic trials. DISCUSSION: We expect that the study outputs will be of interest to a wide range of knowledge users including trialists, ethicists, research ethics committees, journal editors, regulators, healthcare policymakers, research funders and patient groups. All publications will adhere to the Tri-Agency Open Access Policy on Publications. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12910-018-0332-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-11-20 /pmc/articles/PMC6247737/ /pubmed/30458809 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-018-0332-z 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 Study Protocol
Nicholls, Stuart G.
Carroll, Kelly
Brehaut, Jamie
Weijer, Charles
Hey, Spencer Phillips
Goldstein, Cory E.
Zwarenstein, Merrick
Graham, Ian D.
McKenzie, Joanne E.
McIntyre, Lauralyn
Jairath, Vipul
Campbell, Marion K.
Grimshaw, Jeremy M.
Fergusson, Dean A.
Taljaard, Monica
Stakeholder views regarding ethical issues in the design and conduct of pragmatic trials: study protocol
title Stakeholder views regarding ethical issues in the design and conduct of pragmatic trials: study protocol
title_full Stakeholder views regarding ethical issues in the design and conduct of pragmatic trials: study protocol
title_fullStr Stakeholder views regarding ethical issues in the design and conduct of pragmatic trials: study protocol
title_full_unstemmed Stakeholder views regarding ethical issues in the design and conduct of pragmatic trials: study protocol
title_short Stakeholder views regarding ethical issues in the design and conduct of pragmatic trials: study protocol
title_sort stakeholder views regarding ethical issues in the design and conduct of pragmatic trials: study protocol
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6247737/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30458809
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-018-0332-z
work_keys_str_mv AT nichollsstuartg stakeholderviewsregardingethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsstudyprotocol
AT carrollkelly stakeholderviewsregardingethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsstudyprotocol
AT brehautjamie stakeholderviewsregardingethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsstudyprotocol
AT weijercharles stakeholderviewsregardingethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsstudyprotocol
AT heyspencerphillips stakeholderviewsregardingethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsstudyprotocol
AT goldsteincorye stakeholderviewsregardingethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsstudyprotocol
AT zwarensteinmerrick stakeholderviewsregardingethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsstudyprotocol
AT grahamiand stakeholderviewsregardingethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsstudyprotocol
AT mckenziejoannee stakeholderviewsregardingethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsstudyprotocol
AT mcintyrelauralyn stakeholderviewsregardingethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsstudyprotocol
AT jairathvipul stakeholderviewsregardingethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsstudyprotocol
AT campbellmarionk stakeholderviewsregardingethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsstudyprotocol
AT grimshawjeremym stakeholderviewsregardingethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsstudyprotocol
AT fergussondeana stakeholderviewsregardingethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsstudyprotocol
AT taljaardmonica stakeholderviewsregardingethicalissuesinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsstudyprotocol