Cargando…

Two-by-two factorial randomised study within a trial (SWAT) to evaluate strategies for follow-up in a randomised prevention trial

BACKGROUND: Failure to collect outcome data in randomised trials can result in bias and loss of statistical power. Further evaluations of strategies to increase retention are required. We assessed the effectiveness of two strategies for retention in a randomised prevention trial using a two-by-two f...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bradshaw, Lucy E., Montgomery, Alan A., Williams, Hywel C., Chalmers, Joanne R., Haines, Rachel H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7296963/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32546180
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04373-4
_version_ 1783546933114044416
author Bradshaw, Lucy E.
Montgomery, Alan A.
Williams, Hywel C.
Chalmers, Joanne R.
Haines, Rachel H.
author_facet Bradshaw, Lucy E.
Montgomery, Alan A.
Williams, Hywel C.
Chalmers, Joanne R.
Haines, Rachel H.
author_sort Bradshaw, Lucy E.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Failure to collect outcome data in randomised trials can result in bias and loss of statistical power. Further evaluations of strategies to increase retention are required. We assessed the effectiveness of two strategies for retention in a randomised prevention trial using a two-by-two factorial randomised study within a trial (SWAT). METHODS: Parents of babies included in the host trial were randomised to (1) short message service (SMS) notification prior to sending questionnaires at 3, 6, 12 and 18 months versus no SMS notification and (2) a £10 voucher sent with the invitation letter for the primary follow-up visit at 24 months or given at the visit. The two co-primary outcomes were collection of host trial (1) questionnaire data at interim follow-up times and (2) primary outcome at 24 months during a home/clinic visit with a research nurse. RESULTS: Between November 2014 and November 2016, 1394 participants were randomised: 350 to no SMS + voucher at visit, 345 to SMS + voucher at visit, 352 to no SMS + voucher before visit and 347 to SMS + voucher before visit. Overall questionnaire data was collected at interim follow-up times for 75% in both the group allocated to the prior SMS notification and the group allocated to no SMS notification (odds ratio (OR) SMS versus none 1.02, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.25). Host trial primary outcome data was collected at a visit for 557 (80%) allocated to the voucher before the visit in the invitation letter and for 566 (81%) whose parents were allocated to receive the voucher at the visit (OR before versus at visit 0.89, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.17). CONCLUSION: There was no evidence of a difference in retention according to SMS notification or voucher timing. Future synthesis of SWAT results is required to be able to detect small but important incremental effects of retention strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry, ID: ISRCTN21528841. Registered on 25 July 2014. SWAT Repository Store ID 25.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7296963
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72969632020-06-16 Two-by-two factorial randomised study within a trial (SWAT) to evaluate strategies for follow-up in a randomised prevention trial Bradshaw, Lucy E. Montgomery, Alan A. Williams, Hywel C. Chalmers, Joanne R. Haines, Rachel H. Trials Research BACKGROUND: Failure to collect outcome data in randomised trials can result in bias and loss of statistical power. Further evaluations of strategies to increase retention are required. We assessed the effectiveness of two strategies for retention in a randomised prevention trial using a two-by-two factorial randomised study within a trial (SWAT). METHODS: Parents of babies included in the host trial were randomised to (1) short message service (SMS) notification prior to sending questionnaires at 3, 6, 12 and 18 months versus no SMS notification and (2) a £10 voucher sent with the invitation letter for the primary follow-up visit at 24 months or given at the visit. The two co-primary outcomes were collection of host trial (1) questionnaire data at interim follow-up times and (2) primary outcome at 24 months during a home/clinic visit with a research nurse. RESULTS: Between November 2014 and November 2016, 1394 participants were randomised: 350 to no SMS + voucher at visit, 345 to SMS + voucher at visit, 352 to no SMS + voucher before visit and 347 to SMS + voucher before visit. Overall questionnaire data was collected at interim follow-up times for 75% in both the group allocated to the prior SMS notification and the group allocated to no SMS notification (odds ratio (OR) SMS versus none 1.02, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.25). Host trial primary outcome data was collected at a visit for 557 (80%) allocated to the voucher before the visit in the invitation letter and for 566 (81%) whose parents were allocated to receive the voucher at the visit (OR before versus at visit 0.89, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.17). CONCLUSION: There was no evidence of a difference in retention according to SMS notification or voucher timing. Future synthesis of SWAT results is required to be able to detect small but important incremental effects of retention strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry, ID: ISRCTN21528841. Registered on 25 July 2014. SWAT Repository Store ID 25. BioMed Central 2020-06-08 /pmc/articles/PMC7296963/ /pubmed/32546180 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04373-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. 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 in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Bradshaw, Lucy E.
Montgomery, Alan A.
Williams, Hywel C.
Chalmers, Joanne R.
Haines, Rachel H.
Two-by-two factorial randomised study within a trial (SWAT) to evaluate strategies for follow-up in a randomised prevention trial
title Two-by-two factorial randomised study within a trial (SWAT) to evaluate strategies for follow-up in a randomised prevention trial
title_full Two-by-two factorial randomised study within a trial (SWAT) to evaluate strategies for follow-up in a randomised prevention trial
title_fullStr Two-by-two factorial randomised study within a trial (SWAT) to evaluate strategies for follow-up in a randomised prevention trial
title_full_unstemmed Two-by-two factorial randomised study within a trial (SWAT) to evaluate strategies for follow-up in a randomised prevention trial
title_short Two-by-two factorial randomised study within a trial (SWAT) to evaluate strategies for follow-up in a randomised prevention trial
title_sort two-by-two factorial randomised study within a trial (swat) to evaluate strategies for follow-up in a randomised prevention trial
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7296963/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32546180
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04373-4
work_keys_str_mv AT bradshawlucye twobytwofactorialrandomisedstudywithinatrialswattoevaluatestrategiesforfollowupinarandomisedpreventiontrial
AT montgomeryalana twobytwofactorialrandomisedstudywithinatrialswattoevaluatestrategiesforfollowupinarandomisedpreventiontrial
AT williamshywelc twobytwofactorialrandomisedstudywithinatrialswattoevaluatestrategiesforfollowupinarandomisedpreventiontrial
AT chalmersjoanner twobytwofactorialrandomisedstudywithinatrialswattoevaluatestrategiesforfollowupinarandomisedpreventiontrial
AT hainesrachelh twobytwofactorialrandomisedstudywithinatrialswattoevaluatestrategiesforfollowupinarandomisedpreventiontrial