Cargando…

Blinding of study statisticians in clinical trials: a qualitative study in UK clinical trials units

BACKGROUND: Blinding is an established approach in clinical trials which aims to minimise the risk of performance and detection bias. There is little empirical evidence to guide UK clinical trials units (CTUs) about the practice of blinding statisticians. Guidelines recommend that statisticians rema...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Iflaifel, Mais, Partlett, Christopher, Bell, Jennifer, Cook, Andrew, Gamble, Carrol, Julious, Steven, Juszczak, Edmund, Linsell, Louise, Montgomery, Alan, Sprange, Kirsty
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9235168/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35761345
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06481-9
_version_ 1784736250962378752
author Iflaifel, Mais
Partlett, Christopher
Bell, Jennifer
Cook, Andrew
Gamble, Carrol
Julious, Steven
Juszczak, Edmund
Linsell, Louise
Montgomery, Alan
Sprange, Kirsty
author_facet Iflaifel, Mais
Partlett, Christopher
Bell, Jennifer
Cook, Andrew
Gamble, Carrol
Julious, Steven
Juszczak, Edmund
Linsell, Louise
Montgomery, Alan
Sprange, Kirsty
author_sort Iflaifel, Mais
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Blinding is an established approach in clinical trials which aims to minimise the risk of performance and detection bias. There is little empirical evidence to guide UK clinical trials units (CTUs) about the practice of blinding statisticians. Guidelines recommend that statisticians remain blinded to allocation prior to the final analysis. As these guidelines are not based on empirical evidence, this study undertook a qualitative investigation relating to when and how statisticians should be blinded in clinical trials. METHODS: Data were collected through online focus groups with various stakeholders who work in the delivery and oversight of clinical trials. Recordings of the focus groups were transcribed verbatim and thematic analysis was used to analyse the transcripts. RESULTS: Thirty-seven participants from 19 CTUs participated in one of six focus groups. Four main themes were identified, namely statistical models of work, factors affecting the decision to blind statisticians, benefits of blinding/not blinding statisticians and practicalities. Factors influencing the decision to blind the statistician included available resources, study design and types of intervention and outcomes and analysis. Although blinding of the statistician is perceived as a desirable mitigation against bias, there was uncertainty about the extent to which an unblinded statistician might impart bias. Instead, in most cases, the insight that the statistician offers was deemed more important to delivery of a trial than the risk of bias they may introduce if unblinded. Blinding of statisticians was only considered achievable with the appropriate resource and staffing, which were not always available. In many cases, a standard approach to blinding was therefore considered unrealistic and impractical; hence the need for a proportionate risk assessment approach identifying possible mitigations. CONCLUSIONS: There was wide variation in practice between UK CTUs regarding the blinding of trial statisticians. A risk assessment approach would enable CTUs to identify risks associated with unblinded statisticians conducting the final analysis and alternative mitigation strategies. The findings of this study will be used to design guidance and a tool to support this risk assessment process. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06481-9.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9235168
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92351682022-06-28 Blinding of study statisticians in clinical trials: a qualitative study in UK clinical trials units Iflaifel, Mais Partlett, Christopher Bell, Jennifer Cook, Andrew Gamble, Carrol Julious, Steven Juszczak, Edmund Linsell, Louise Montgomery, Alan Sprange, Kirsty Trials Research BACKGROUND: Blinding is an established approach in clinical trials which aims to minimise the risk of performance and detection bias. There is little empirical evidence to guide UK clinical trials units (CTUs) about the practice of blinding statisticians. Guidelines recommend that statisticians remain blinded to allocation prior to the final analysis. As these guidelines are not based on empirical evidence, this study undertook a qualitative investigation relating to when and how statisticians should be blinded in clinical trials. METHODS: Data were collected through online focus groups with various stakeholders who work in the delivery and oversight of clinical trials. Recordings of the focus groups were transcribed verbatim and thematic analysis was used to analyse the transcripts. RESULTS: Thirty-seven participants from 19 CTUs participated in one of six focus groups. Four main themes were identified, namely statistical models of work, factors affecting the decision to blind statisticians, benefits of blinding/not blinding statisticians and practicalities. Factors influencing the decision to blind the statistician included available resources, study design and types of intervention and outcomes and analysis. Although blinding of the statistician is perceived as a desirable mitigation against bias, there was uncertainty about the extent to which an unblinded statistician might impart bias. Instead, in most cases, the insight that the statistician offers was deemed more important to delivery of a trial than the risk of bias they may introduce if unblinded. Blinding of statisticians was only considered achievable with the appropriate resource and staffing, which were not always available. In many cases, a standard approach to blinding was therefore considered unrealistic and impractical; hence the need for a proportionate risk assessment approach identifying possible mitigations. CONCLUSIONS: There was wide variation in practice between UK CTUs regarding the blinding of trial statisticians. A risk assessment approach would enable CTUs to identify risks associated with unblinded statisticians conducting the final analysis and alternative mitigation strategies. The findings of this study will be used to design guidance and a tool to support this risk assessment process. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06481-9. BioMed Central 2022-06-27 /pmc/articles/PMC9235168/ /pubmed/35761345 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06481-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/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/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://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
Iflaifel, Mais
Partlett, Christopher
Bell, Jennifer
Cook, Andrew
Gamble, Carrol
Julious, Steven
Juszczak, Edmund
Linsell, Louise
Montgomery, Alan
Sprange, Kirsty
Blinding of study statisticians in clinical trials: a qualitative study in UK clinical trials units
title Blinding of study statisticians in clinical trials: a qualitative study in UK clinical trials units
title_full Blinding of study statisticians in clinical trials: a qualitative study in UK clinical trials units
title_fullStr Blinding of study statisticians in clinical trials: a qualitative study in UK clinical trials units
title_full_unstemmed Blinding of study statisticians in clinical trials: a qualitative study in UK clinical trials units
title_short Blinding of study statisticians in clinical trials: a qualitative study in UK clinical trials units
title_sort blinding of study statisticians in clinical trials: a qualitative study in uk clinical trials units
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9235168/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35761345
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06481-9
work_keys_str_mv AT iflaifelmais blindingofstudystatisticiansinclinicaltrialsaqualitativestudyinukclinicaltrialsunits
AT partlettchristopher blindingofstudystatisticiansinclinicaltrialsaqualitativestudyinukclinicaltrialsunits
AT belljennifer blindingofstudystatisticiansinclinicaltrialsaqualitativestudyinukclinicaltrialsunits
AT cookandrew blindingofstudystatisticiansinclinicaltrialsaqualitativestudyinukclinicaltrialsunits
AT gamblecarrol blindingofstudystatisticiansinclinicaltrialsaqualitativestudyinukclinicaltrialsunits
AT julioussteven blindingofstudystatisticiansinclinicaltrialsaqualitativestudyinukclinicaltrialsunits
AT juszczakedmund blindingofstudystatisticiansinclinicaltrialsaqualitativestudyinukclinicaltrialsunits
AT linselllouise blindingofstudystatisticiansinclinicaltrialsaqualitativestudyinukclinicaltrialsunits
AT montgomeryalan blindingofstudystatisticiansinclinicaltrialsaqualitativestudyinukclinicaltrialsunits
AT sprangekirsty blindingofstudystatisticiansinclinicaltrialsaqualitativestudyinukclinicaltrialsunits