Cargando…
A good use of time? Providing evidence for how effort is invested in primary and secondary outcome data collection in trials
BACKGROUND: Data collection is a substantial part of trial workload for participants and staff alike. How these hours of work are spent is important because stakeholders are more interested in some outcomes than others. The ORINOCO study compared the time spent collecting primary outcome data to the...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9793601/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36575542 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06973-8 |
_version_ | 1784859875999744000 |
---|---|
author | Gardner, Heidi Elfeky, Adel Pickles, David Dawson, Annabel Gillies, Katie Warwick, Violet Treweek, Shaun |
author_facet | Gardner, Heidi Elfeky, Adel Pickles, David Dawson, Annabel Gillies, Katie Warwick, Violet Treweek, Shaun |
author_sort | Gardner, Heidi |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Data collection is a substantial part of trial workload for participants and staff alike. How these hours of work are spent is important because stakeholders are more interested in some outcomes than others. The ORINOCO study compared the time spent collecting primary outcome data to the time spent collecting secondary outcome data in a cohort of trials. METHODS: We searched PubMed for phase III trials indexed between 2015 and 2019. From these, we randomly selected 120 trials evaluating a therapeutic intervention plus an additional random selection of 20 trials evaluating a public health intervention. We also added eligible trials from a cohort of 189 trials in rheumatology that had used the same core outcome set. We then obtained the time taken to collect primary and secondary outcomes in each trial. We used a hierarchy of methods that included data in trial reports, contacting the trial team and approaching individuals with experience of using the identified outcome measures. We calculated the primary to secondary data collection time ratio and notional data collection cost for each included trial. RESULTS: We included 161 trials (120 phase III; 21 core outcome set; 20 public health), which together collected 230 primary and 688 secondary outcomes. Full primary and secondary timing data were obtained for 134 trials (100 phase III; 17 core outcome set; 17 public health). The median time spent on primaries was 56.1 h (range: 0.0–10,746.7, IQR: 226.89) and the median time spent on secondaries was 190.7 hours (range: 0.0–1,356,832.9, IQR: 617.6). The median primary to secondary data collection time ratio was 1.0:3.0 (i.e. for every minute spent on primary outcomes, 3.0 were spent on secondaries). The ratio varied by trial type: phase III trials were 1.0:3.1, core outcome set 1.0:3.4 and public health trials 1.0:2.2. The median notional overall data collection cost was £8015.73 (range: £52.90–£31,899,140.70, IQR: £20,096.64). CONCLUSIONS: Depending on trial type, between two and three times as much time is spent collecting secondary outcome data than collecting primary outcome data. Trial teams should explicitly consider how long it will take to collect the data for an outcome and decide whether that time is worth it given importance of the outcome to the trial. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06973-8. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9793601 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-97936012022-12-28 A good use of time? Providing evidence for how effort is invested in primary and secondary outcome data collection in trials Gardner, Heidi Elfeky, Adel Pickles, David Dawson, Annabel Gillies, Katie Warwick, Violet Treweek, Shaun Trials Methodology BACKGROUND: Data collection is a substantial part of trial workload for participants and staff alike. How these hours of work are spent is important because stakeholders are more interested in some outcomes than others. The ORINOCO study compared the time spent collecting primary outcome data to the time spent collecting secondary outcome data in a cohort of trials. METHODS: We searched PubMed for phase III trials indexed between 2015 and 2019. From these, we randomly selected 120 trials evaluating a therapeutic intervention plus an additional random selection of 20 trials evaluating a public health intervention. We also added eligible trials from a cohort of 189 trials in rheumatology that had used the same core outcome set. We then obtained the time taken to collect primary and secondary outcomes in each trial. We used a hierarchy of methods that included data in trial reports, contacting the trial team and approaching individuals with experience of using the identified outcome measures. We calculated the primary to secondary data collection time ratio and notional data collection cost for each included trial. RESULTS: We included 161 trials (120 phase III; 21 core outcome set; 20 public health), which together collected 230 primary and 688 secondary outcomes. Full primary and secondary timing data were obtained for 134 trials (100 phase III; 17 core outcome set; 17 public health). The median time spent on primaries was 56.1 h (range: 0.0–10,746.7, IQR: 226.89) and the median time spent on secondaries was 190.7 hours (range: 0.0–1,356,832.9, IQR: 617.6). The median primary to secondary data collection time ratio was 1.0:3.0 (i.e. for every minute spent on primary outcomes, 3.0 were spent on secondaries). The ratio varied by trial type: phase III trials were 1.0:3.1, core outcome set 1.0:3.4 and public health trials 1.0:2.2. The median notional overall data collection cost was £8015.73 (range: £52.90–£31,899,140.70, IQR: £20,096.64). CONCLUSIONS: Depending on trial type, between two and three times as much time is spent collecting secondary outcome data than collecting primary outcome data. Trial teams should explicitly consider how long it will take to collect the data for an outcome and decide whether that time is worth it given importance of the outcome to the trial. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06973-8. BioMed Central 2022-12-27 /pmc/articles/PMC9793601/ /pubmed/36575542 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06973-8 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 | Methodology Gardner, Heidi Elfeky, Adel Pickles, David Dawson, Annabel Gillies, Katie Warwick, Violet Treweek, Shaun A good use of time? Providing evidence for how effort is invested in primary and secondary outcome data collection in trials |
title | A good use of time? Providing evidence for how effort is invested in primary and secondary outcome data collection in trials |
title_full | A good use of time? Providing evidence for how effort is invested in primary and secondary outcome data collection in trials |
title_fullStr | A good use of time? Providing evidence for how effort is invested in primary and secondary outcome data collection in trials |
title_full_unstemmed | A good use of time? Providing evidence for how effort is invested in primary and secondary outcome data collection in trials |
title_short | A good use of time? Providing evidence for how effort is invested in primary and secondary outcome data collection in trials |
title_sort | good use of time? providing evidence for how effort is invested in primary and secondary outcome data collection in trials |
topic | Methodology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9793601/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36575542 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06973-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gardnerheidi agooduseoftimeprovidingevidenceforhoweffortisinvestedinprimaryandsecondaryoutcomedatacollectionintrials AT elfekyadel agooduseoftimeprovidingevidenceforhoweffortisinvestedinprimaryandsecondaryoutcomedatacollectionintrials AT picklesdavid agooduseoftimeprovidingevidenceforhoweffortisinvestedinprimaryandsecondaryoutcomedatacollectionintrials AT dawsonannabel agooduseoftimeprovidingevidenceforhoweffortisinvestedinprimaryandsecondaryoutcomedatacollectionintrials AT gillieskatie agooduseoftimeprovidingevidenceforhoweffortisinvestedinprimaryandsecondaryoutcomedatacollectionintrials AT warwickviolet agooduseoftimeprovidingevidenceforhoweffortisinvestedinprimaryandsecondaryoutcomedatacollectionintrials AT treweekshaun agooduseoftimeprovidingevidenceforhoweffortisinvestedinprimaryandsecondaryoutcomedatacollectionintrials AT gardnerheidi gooduseoftimeprovidingevidenceforhoweffortisinvestedinprimaryandsecondaryoutcomedatacollectionintrials AT elfekyadel gooduseoftimeprovidingevidenceforhoweffortisinvestedinprimaryandsecondaryoutcomedatacollectionintrials AT picklesdavid gooduseoftimeprovidingevidenceforhoweffortisinvestedinprimaryandsecondaryoutcomedatacollectionintrials AT dawsonannabel gooduseoftimeprovidingevidenceforhoweffortisinvestedinprimaryandsecondaryoutcomedatacollectionintrials AT gillieskatie gooduseoftimeprovidingevidenceforhoweffortisinvestedinprimaryandsecondaryoutcomedatacollectionintrials AT warwickviolet gooduseoftimeprovidingevidenceforhoweffortisinvestedinprimaryandsecondaryoutcomedatacollectionintrials AT treweekshaun gooduseoftimeprovidingevidenceforhoweffortisinvestedinprimaryandsecondaryoutcomedatacollectionintrials |