Cargando…
The ethical challenges raised in the design and conduct of pragmatic trials: an interview study with key stakeholders
BACKGROUND: There is a concern that the apparent effectiveness of interventions tested in clinical trials may not be an accurate reflection of their actual effectiveness in usual practice. Pragmatic randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are designed with the intent of addressing this discrepancy. Whil...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6929346/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31870433 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-3899-x |
_version_ | 1783482682881081344 |
---|---|
author | Nicholls, Stuart G. Carroll, Kelly Zwarenstein, Merrick Brehaut, Jamie C. Weijer, Charles Hey, Spencer P. Goldstein, Cory E. Graham, Ian D. Grimshaw, Jeremy M. McKenzie, Joanne E. Fergusson, Dean A. Taljaard, Monica |
author_facet | Nicholls, Stuart G. Carroll, Kelly Zwarenstein, Merrick Brehaut, Jamie C. Weijer, Charles Hey, Spencer P. Goldstein, Cory E. Graham, Ian D. Grimshaw, Jeremy M. McKenzie, Joanne E. Fergusson, Dean A. Taljaard, Monica |
author_sort | Nicholls, Stuart G. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: There is a concern that the apparent effectiveness of interventions tested in clinical trials may not be an accurate reflection of their actual effectiveness in usual practice. Pragmatic randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are designed with the intent of addressing this discrepancy. While pragmatic RCTs may increase the relevance of research findings to practice they may also raise new ethical concerns (even while reducing others). To explore this question, we interviewed key stakeholders with the aim of identifying potential ethical challenges in the design and conduct of pragmatic RCTs with a view to developing future guidance on these issues. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with clinical investigators, methodologists, patient partners, ethicists, and other knowledge users (e.g., regulators). Interviews covered experiences with pragmatic RCTs, ethical issues relevant to pragmatic RCTs, and perspectives on the appropriate oversight of pragmatic RCTs. Interviews were coded inductively by two coders. Interim and final analyses were presented to the broader team for comment and discussion before the analytic framework was finalized. RESULTS: We conducted 45 interviews between April and September 2018. Interviewees represented a range of disciplines and jurisdictions as well as varying content expertise. Issues of importance in pragmatic RCTs were (1) identification of relevant risks from trial participation and determination of what constitutes minimal risk; (2) determining when alterations to traditional informed consent approaches are appropriate; (3) the distinction between research, quality improvement, and practice; (4) the potential for broader populations to be affected by the trial and what protections they might be owed; (5) the broader range of trial stakeholders in pragmatic RCTs, and determining their roles and responsibilities; and (6) determining what constitutes “usual care” and implications for trial reporting. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest both the need to discuss familiar ethical topics in new ways and that there are new ethical issues in pragmatic RCTs that need greater attention. Addressing the highlighted issues and developing guidance will require multidisciplinary input, including patient and community members, within a broader and more comprehensive analysis that extends beyond consent and attends to the identified considerations relating to risk and stakeholder roles and responsibilities. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6929346 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-69293462019-12-30 The ethical challenges raised in the design and conduct of pragmatic trials: an interview study with key stakeholders Nicholls, Stuart G. Carroll, Kelly Zwarenstein, Merrick Brehaut, Jamie C. Weijer, Charles Hey, Spencer P. Goldstein, Cory E. Graham, Ian D. Grimshaw, Jeremy M. McKenzie, Joanne E. Fergusson, Dean A. Taljaard, Monica Trials Research BACKGROUND: There is a concern that the apparent effectiveness of interventions tested in clinical trials may not be an accurate reflection of their actual effectiveness in usual practice. Pragmatic randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are designed with the intent of addressing this discrepancy. While pragmatic RCTs may increase the relevance of research findings to practice they may also raise new ethical concerns (even while reducing others). To explore this question, we interviewed key stakeholders with the aim of identifying potential ethical challenges in the design and conduct of pragmatic RCTs with a view to developing future guidance on these issues. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with clinical investigators, methodologists, patient partners, ethicists, and other knowledge users (e.g., regulators). Interviews covered experiences with pragmatic RCTs, ethical issues relevant to pragmatic RCTs, and perspectives on the appropriate oversight of pragmatic RCTs. Interviews were coded inductively by two coders. Interim and final analyses were presented to the broader team for comment and discussion before the analytic framework was finalized. RESULTS: We conducted 45 interviews between April and September 2018. Interviewees represented a range of disciplines and jurisdictions as well as varying content expertise. Issues of importance in pragmatic RCTs were (1) identification of relevant risks from trial participation and determination of what constitutes minimal risk; (2) determining when alterations to traditional informed consent approaches are appropriate; (3) the distinction between research, quality improvement, and practice; (4) the potential for broader populations to be affected by the trial and what protections they might be owed; (5) the broader range of trial stakeholders in pragmatic RCTs, and determining their roles and responsibilities; and (6) determining what constitutes “usual care” and implications for trial reporting. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest both the need to discuss familiar ethical topics in new ways and that there are new ethical issues in pragmatic RCTs that need greater attention. Addressing the highlighted issues and developing guidance will require multidisciplinary input, including patient and community members, within a broader and more comprehensive analysis that extends beyond consent and attends to the identified considerations relating to risk and stakeholder roles and responsibilities. BioMed Central 2019-12-23 /pmc/articles/PMC6929346/ /pubmed/31870433 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-3899-x 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 Nicholls, Stuart G. Carroll, Kelly Zwarenstein, Merrick Brehaut, Jamie C. Weijer, Charles Hey, Spencer P. Goldstein, Cory E. Graham, Ian D. Grimshaw, Jeremy M. McKenzie, Joanne E. Fergusson, Dean A. Taljaard, Monica The ethical challenges raised in the design and conduct of pragmatic trials: an interview study with key stakeholders |
title | The ethical challenges raised in the design and conduct of pragmatic trials: an interview study with key stakeholders |
title_full | The ethical challenges raised in the design and conduct of pragmatic trials: an interview study with key stakeholders |
title_fullStr | The ethical challenges raised in the design and conduct of pragmatic trials: an interview study with key stakeholders |
title_full_unstemmed | The ethical challenges raised in the design and conduct of pragmatic trials: an interview study with key stakeholders |
title_short | The ethical challenges raised in the design and conduct of pragmatic trials: an interview study with key stakeholders |
title_sort | ethical challenges raised in the design and conduct of pragmatic trials: an interview study with key stakeholders |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6929346/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31870433 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-3899-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nichollsstuartg theethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders AT carrollkelly theethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders AT zwarensteinmerrick theethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders AT brehautjamiec theethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders AT weijercharles theethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders AT heyspencerp theethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders AT goldsteincorye theethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders AT grahamiand theethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders AT grimshawjeremym theethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders AT mckenziejoannee theethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders AT fergussondeana theethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders AT taljaardmonica theethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders AT theethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders AT nichollsstuartg ethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders AT carrollkelly ethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders AT zwarensteinmerrick ethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders AT brehautjamiec ethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders AT weijercharles ethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders AT heyspencerp ethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders AT goldsteincorye ethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders AT grahamiand ethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders AT grimshawjeremym ethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders AT mckenziejoannee ethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders AT fergussondeana ethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders AT taljaardmonica ethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders AT ethicalchallengesraisedinthedesignandconductofpragmatictrialsaninterviewstudywithkeystakeholders |