Cargando…
Synthesizing existing evidence to design future trials: survey of methodologists from European institutions
BACKGROUND: ‘Conditional trial design’ is a framework for efficiently planning new clinical trials based on a network of relevant existing trials. The framework considers whether new trials are required and how the existing evidence can be used to answer the research question and plan future researc...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6555919/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31174597 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-3449-6 |
_version_ | 1783425235473661952 |
---|---|
author | Nikolakopoulou, Adriani Trelle, Sven Sutton, Alex J. Egger, Matthias Salanti, Georgia |
author_facet | Nikolakopoulou, Adriani Trelle, Sven Sutton, Alex J. Egger, Matthias Salanti, Georgia |
author_sort | Nikolakopoulou, Adriani |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: ‘Conditional trial design’ is a framework for efficiently planning new clinical trials based on a network of relevant existing trials. The framework considers whether new trials are required and how the existing evidence can be used to answer the research question and plan future research. The potential of this approach has not been fully realized. METHODS: We conducted an online survey among trial statisticians, methodologists, and users of evidence synthesis research using referral sampling to capture opinions about the conditional trial design framework and current practices among clinical researchers. The questions included in the survey were related to the decision of whether a meta-analysis answers the research question, the optimal way to synthesize available evidence, which relates to the acceptability of network meta-analysis, and the use of evidence synthesis in the planning of new studies. RESULTS: In total, 76 researchers completed the survey. Two out of three survey participants (65%) were willing to possibly or definitely consider using evidence synthesis to design a future clinical trial and around half of the participants would give priority to such a trial design. The median rating of the frequency of using such a trial design was 0.41 on a scale from 0 (never) to 1 (always). Major barriers to adopting conditional trial design include the current regulatory paradigm and the policies of funding agencies and sponsors. CONCLUSIONS: Participants reported moderate interest in using evidence synthesis methods in the design of future trials. They indicated that a major paradigm shift is required before the use of network meta-analysis is regularly employed in the design of trials. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3449-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6555919 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-65559192019-06-10 Synthesizing existing evidence to design future trials: survey of methodologists from European institutions Nikolakopoulou, Adriani Trelle, Sven Sutton, Alex J. Egger, Matthias Salanti, Georgia Trials Research BACKGROUND: ‘Conditional trial design’ is a framework for efficiently planning new clinical trials based on a network of relevant existing trials. The framework considers whether new trials are required and how the existing evidence can be used to answer the research question and plan future research. The potential of this approach has not been fully realized. METHODS: We conducted an online survey among trial statisticians, methodologists, and users of evidence synthesis research using referral sampling to capture opinions about the conditional trial design framework and current practices among clinical researchers. The questions included in the survey were related to the decision of whether a meta-analysis answers the research question, the optimal way to synthesize available evidence, which relates to the acceptability of network meta-analysis, and the use of evidence synthesis in the planning of new studies. RESULTS: In total, 76 researchers completed the survey. Two out of three survey participants (65%) were willing to possibly or definitely consider using evidence synthesis to design a future clinical trial and around half of the participants would give priority to such a trial design. The median rating of the frequency of using such a trial design was 0.41 on a scale from 0 (never) to 1 (always). Major barriers to adopting conditional trial design include the current regulatory paradigm and the policies of funding agencies and sponsors. CONCLUSIONS: Participants reported moderate interest in using evidence synthesis methods in the design of future trials. They indicated that a major paradigm shift is required before the use of network meta-analysis is regularly employed in the design of trials. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3449-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2019-06-07 /pmc/articles/PMC6555919/ /pubmed/31174597 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-3449-6 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 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 Nikolakopoulou, Adriani Trelle, Sven Sutton, Alex J. Egger, Matthias Salanti, Georgia Synthesizing existing evidence to design future trials: survey of methodologists from European institutions |
title | Synthesizing existing evidence to design future trials: survey of methodologists from European institutions |
title_full | Synthesizing existing evidence to design future trials: survey of methodologists from European institutions |
title_fullStr | Synthesizing existing evidence to design future trials: survey of methodologists from European institutions |
title_full_unstemmed | Synthesizing existing evidence to design future trials: survey of methodologists from European institutions |
title_short | Synthesizing existing evidence to design future trials: survey of methodologists from European institutions |
title_sort | synthesizing existing evidence to design future trials: survey of methodologists from european institutions |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6555919/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31174597 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-3449-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nikolakopoulouadriani synthesizingexistingevidencetodesignfuturetrialssurveyofmethodologistsfromeuropeaninstitutions AT trellesven synthesizingexistingevidencetodesignfuturetrialssurveyofmethodologistsfromeuropeaninstitutions AT suttonalexj synthesizingexistingevidencetodesignfuturetrialssurveyofmethodologistsfromeuropeaninstitutions AT eggermatthias synthesizingexistingevidencetodesignfuturetrialssurveyofmethodologistsfromeuropeaninstitutions AT salantigeorgia synthesizingexistingevidencetodesignfuturetrialssurveyofmethodologistsfromeuropeaninstitutions |