首页 > 最新文献

Clinical Trials最新文献

英文 中文
Standardising management of consent withdrawal and other clinical trial participation changes: The UKCRC Registered Clinical Trials Unit Network's PeRSEVERE project. 同意撤回和其他临床试验参与变化的标准化管理:UKCRC注册临床试验单位网络的PeRSEVERE项目。
IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL Pub Date : 2025-10-01 Epub Date: 2025-07-04 DOI: 10.1177/17407745251344524
William J Cragg, Laura Clifton-Hadley, Jeremy Dearling, Susan J Dutton, Katie Gillies, Pollyanna Hardy, Daniel Hind, Søren Holm, Kerenza Hood, Anna Kearney, Rebecca Lewis, Sarah Markham, Lauren Moreau, Tra My Pham, Amanda Roberts, Sharon Ruddock, Mirjana Sirovica, Ratna Sohanpal, Puvan Tharmanathan, Rejina Verghis
<p><strong>Background/aims: </strong>Existing regulatory and ethical guidance does not address real-life complexities in how clinical trial participants' level of participation may change. If these complexities are inappropriately managed, there may be negative consequences for trial participants and the integrity of trials they participate in. These concerns have been highlighted over many years, but there remains no single, comprehensive guidance for managing participation changes in ways that address real-life complexities while maximally promoting participant interests and trial integrity. Motivated by the lack of agreed standards, and observed variability in practice, representatives from academic clinical trials units and linked organisations in the United Kingdom initiated the PeRSEVERE project (PRincipleS for handling end-of-participation EVEnts in clinical trials REsearch) to agree on guiding principles and explore how these principles should be implemented.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed the PeRSEVERE principles through discussion and debate within a large, multidisciplinary collaboration, including research professionals and public contributors. We took an inclusive approach to drafting the principles, incorporating new ideas if they were within project scope. Our draft principles were scrutinised through an international consultation survey which focussed on the principles' clarity, feasibility, novelty and acceptability. Survey responses were analysed descriptively (for category questions) and using a combination of deductive and inductive analysis (for open questions). We used predefined rules to guide feedback handling. After finalising the principles, we developed accompanying implementation guidance from several sources.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 280 people from 9 countries took part in the consultation survey. Feedback showed strong support for the principles with 96% of respondents agreeing with the principles' key messages. Based on our predefined rules, it was not necessary to amend our draft principles, but comments were nonetheless used to enhance the final project outputs. Our 17 finalised principles comprise 7 fundamental, 'overarching' principles, 6 about trial design and setup, 2 covering data collection and monitoring, and 2 on trial analysis and reporting.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We devised a comprehensive set of guiding principles, with detailed practical recommendations, to aid the management of clinical trial participation changes, building on existing ethical and regulatory texts. Our outputs reflect the contributions of a substantial number of individuals, including public contributors and research professionals with various specialisms. This lends weight to our recommendations, which have implications for everyone who designs, funds, conducts, oversees or participates in trials. We suggest our principles could lead to improved standards in clinical trials and better exper
背景/目的:现有的监管和伦理指导没有解决临床试验参与者参与水平如何变化的现实复杂性。如果这些复杂性管理不当,可能会对试验参与者和他们参与的试验的完整性产生负面影响。多年来,人们一直在强调这些问题,但仍然没有一个单一的、全面的指导方针来管理参与变化,以解决现实生活中的复杂性,同时最大限度地促进参与者的利益和审判的完整性。由于缺乏商定的标准,以及在实践中观察到的可变性,来自英国学术临床试验单位和相关组织的代表发起了PeRSEVERE项目(处理临床试验研究中参与结束事件的原则),以商定指导原则并探索如何实施这些原则。方法:我们通过一个大型的、多学科合作的讨论和辩论,包括研究专业人员和公众贡献者,制定了PeRSEVERE原则。我们采用包容性的方法起草原则,如果在项目范围内纳入新的想法。我们的原则草案通过一项国际咨询调查进行了仔细审查,调查的重点是原则的明确性、可行性、新颖性和可接受性。对调查结果进行了描述性分析(针对类别问题),并结合了演绎和归纳分析(针对开放式问题)。我们使用预定义的规则来指导反馈处理。在最终确定原则之后,我们从几个来源开发了相应的实施指南。结果:共有来自9个国家的280人参与了咨询调查。反馈显示,这些原则得到了大力支持,96%的受访者同意这些原则的主要信息。根据我们预先确定的规则,没有必要修改我们的原则草案,但仍然使用了评论意见来加强最后的项目产出。我们最终确定的17项原则包括7项基本的“总体”原则,6项关于试验设计和设置,2项涉及数据收集和监测,2项涉及试验分析和报告。结论:我们设计了一套全面的指导原则,包括详细的实用建议,以现有的伦理和监管文本为基础,帮助管理临床试验参与的变化。我们的成果反映了大量个人的贡献,包括公共贡献者和不同专业的研究专业人员。这为我们的建议增加了分量,这些建议对设计、资助、实施、监督或参与试验的每个人都有影响。我们认为我们的原则可以提高临床试验的标准,为参与者提供更好的体验。我们鼓励其他人以我们的工作为基础,探索这些想法在其他环境中的应用,并产生经验证据来支持这一领域的最佳实践。
{"title":"Standardising management of consent withdrawal and other clinical trial participation changes: The UKCRC Registered Clinical Trials Unit Network's PeRSEVERE project.","authors":"William J Cragg, Laura Clifton-Hadley, Jeremy Dearling, Susan J Dutton, Katie Gillies, Pollyanna Hardy, Daniel Hind, Søren Holm, Kerenza Hood, Anna Kearney, Rebecca Lewis, Sarah Markham, Lauren Moreau, Tra My Pham, Amanda Roberts, Sharon Ruddock, Mirjana Sirovica, Ratna Sohanpal, Puvan Tharmanathan, Rejina Verghis","doi":"10.1177/17407745251344524","DOIUrl":"10.1177/17407745251344524","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background/aims: &lt;/strong&gt;Existing regulatory and ethical guidance does not address real-life complexities in how clinical trial participants' level of participation may change. If these complexities are inappropriately managed, there may be negative consequences for trial participants and the integrity of trials they participate in. These concerns have been highlighted over many years, but there remains no single, comprehensive guidance for managing participation changes in ways that address real-life complexities while maximally promoting participant interests and trial integrity. Motivated by the lack of agreed standards, and observed variability in practice, representatives from academic clinical trials units and linked organisations in the United Kingdom initiated the PeRSEVERE project (PRincipleS for handling end-of-participation EVEnts in clinical trials REsearch) to agree on guiding principles and explore how these principles should be implemented.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods: &lt;/strong&gt;We developed the PeRSEVERE principles through discussion and debate within a large, multidisciplinary collaboration, including research professionals and public contributors. We took an inclusive approach to drafting the principles, incorporating new ideas if they were within project scope. Our draft principles were scrutinised through an international consultation survey which focussed on the principles' clarity, feasibility, novelty and acceptability. Survey responses were analysed descriptively (for category questions) and using a combination of deductive and inductive analysis (for open questions). We used predefined rules to guide feedback handling. After finalising the principles, we developed accompanying implementation guidance from several sources.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results: &lt;/strong&gt;In total, 280 people from 9 countries took part in the consultation survey. Feedback showed strong support for the principles with 96% of respondents agreeing with the principles' key messages. Based on our predefined rules, it was not necessary to amend our draft principles, but comments were nonetheless used to enhance the final project outputs. Our 17 finalised principles comprise 7 fundamental, 'overarching' principles, 6 about trial design and setup, 2 covering data collection and monitoring, and 2 on trial analysis and reporting.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusion: &lt;/strong&gt;We devised a comprehensive set of guiding principles, with detailed practical recommendations, to aid the management of clinical trial participation changes, building on existing ethical and regulatory texts. Our outputs reflect the contributions of a substantial number of individuals, including public contributors and research professionals with various specialisms. This lends weight to our recommendations, which have implications for everyone who designs, funds, conducts, oversees or participates in trials. We suggest our principles could lead to improved standards in clinical trials and better exper","PeriodicalId":10685,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Trials","volume":" ","pages":"578-596"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12476473/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144559362","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Quality management of a multi-center randomized controlled feeding trial: A prospective observational study. 多中心随机对照喂养试验的质量管理:一项前瞻性观察研究。
IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL Pub Date : 2025-10-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-30 DOI: 10.1177/17407745251324653
Xiayan Chen, Huijuan Li, Lin Feng, Xi Lan, Shuyi Li, Yanfang Zhao, Guo Zeng, Huilian Zhu, Jianqin Sun, Yanfang Wang, Yangfeng Wu

BackgroundNutrition and dietary trials are often prone to bias, leading to inaccurate or questionable estimates of intervention efficacy. However, reports on quality management practices of well-controlled dietary trials are scarce. This study aims to introduce the quality management system of the Diet, ExerCIse and CarDiovascular hEalth-Diet Study and report its performance in ensuring study quality.MethodsThe quality management system consisted of a study coordinating center, trial governance, and quality control measures covering study design, conduct, and data analysis and reporting. Metrics for evaluating the performance of the system were collected throughout the whole trial development and conducted from September 2016 to June 2021, covering major activities at the coordinating center, study sites, and central laboratories, with a focus on the protocol amendments, protocol deviations (eligibility, fidelity, confounders management, loss to follow-up and outside-of-window visits, and blindness success), and measurement accuracy.ResultsThree amendments to the study protocol enhanced feasibility. All participants (265) met the eligibility criteria. Among them, only 3% were lost to the primary outcome follow-up measurement. More than 95% of participants completed the study, they consumed more than 96% of the study meals, and more than 94% of participants consumed more than 18 meals per week, with no between-group differences. Online monitoring of nutrient targets for the intervention diet showed that all targets were achieved except for the fiber intake, which was 4.3 g less on average. Only 3% experienced a body weight change greater than 2.0 kg, and 3% had medication changes which were not allowed by the study. James' blinding index at the end of the study was 0.68. The end digits of both systolic and diastolic blood pressure readings were distributed equally. For laboratory measures, 100% of standard samples, 97% of blood-split samples, and 87% of urine-split samples had test results within the acceptable range. Only 1.4% of data items required queries, for which only 30% needed corrections.DiscussionThe Diet, ExerCIse and CarDiovascular hEalth-Diet Study quality management system provides a framework for conducting a high-quality dietary intervention clinical trial.

背景:营养和饮食试验往往容易出现偏差,导致对干预效果的估计不准确或有问题。然而,关于控制良好的饮食试验的质量管理实践的报道很少。本研究旨在介绍饮食、运动与心血管健康饮食研究的质量管理体系,并报告其在保证研究质量方面的效果。方法质量管理体系由研究协调中心、试验治理和质量控制措施组成,包括研究设计、实施、数据分析和报告。在2016年9月至2021年6月的整个试验开发过程中收集了评估系统性能的指标,涵盖了协调中心、研究地点和中心实验室的主要活动,重点关注方案修订、方案偏差(合格性、保真度、混杂因素管理、随访和窗外访问损失、盲检成功)和测量准确性。结果研究方案的三次修改增强了可行性。265名参与者均符合入选标准。其中,只有3%的患者在主要结局随访测量中丢失。超过95%的参与者完成了研究,他们吃了超过96%的研究餐,超过94%的参与者每周吃了超过18顿饭,没有组间差异。干预饮食的营养指标在线监测显示,除了纤维摄入量平均减少4.3克外,所有指标都达到了。只有3%的人体重变化超过2.0公斤,3%的人服用了研究不允许的药物。James在研究结束时的致盲指数为0.68。收缩压和舒张压的尾数分布均匀。对于实验室测量,100%的标准样本、97%的血液分离样本和87%的尿液分离样本的测试结果在可接受范围内。只有1.4%的数据项需要查询,其中只有30%需要更正。饮食、运动与心血管健康-饮食研究质量管理体系为开展高质量的饮食干预临床试验提供了框架。
{"title":"Quality management of a multi-center randomized controlled feeding trial: A prospective observational study.","authors":"Xiayan Chen, Huijuan Li, Lin Feng, Xi Lan, Shuyi Li, Yanfang Zhao, Guo Zeng, Huilian Zhu, Jianqin Sun, Yanfang Wang, Yangfeng Wu","doi":"10.1177/17407745251324653","DOIUrl":"10.1177/17407745251324653","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BackgroundNutrition and dietary trials are often prone to bias, leading to inaccurate or questionable estimates of intervention efficacy. However, reports on quality management practices of well-controlled dietary trials are scarce. This study aims to introduce the quality management system of the Diet, ExerCIse and CarDiovascular hEalth-Diet Study and report its performance in ensuring study quality.MethodsThe quality management system consisted of a study coordinating center, trial governance, and quality control measures covering study design, conduct, and data analysis and reporting. Metrics for evaluating the performance of the system were collected throughout the whole trial development and conducted from September 2016 to June 2021, covering major activities at the coordinating center, study sites, and central laboratories, with a focus on the protocol amendments, protocol deviations (eligibility, fidelity, confounders management, loss to follow-up and outside-of-window visits, and blindness success), and measurement accuracy.ResultsThree amendments to the study protocol enhanced feasibility. All participants (265) met the eligibility criteria. Among them, only 3% were lost to the primary outcome follow-up measurement. More than 95% of participants completed the study, they consumed more than 96% of the study meals, and more than 94% of participants consumed more than 18 meals per week, with no between-group differences. Online monitoring of nutrient targets for the intervention diet showed that all targets were achieved except for the fiber intake, which was 4.3 g less on average. Only 3% experienced a body weight change greater than 2.0 kg, and 3% had medication changes which were not allowed by the study. James' blinding index at the end of the study was 0.68. The end digits of both systolic and diastolic blood pressure readings were distributed equally. For laboratory measures, 100% of standard samples, 97% of blood-split samples, and 87% of urine-split samples had test results within the acceptable range. Only 1.4% of data items required queries, for which only 30% needed corrections.DiscussionThe Diet, ExerCIse and CarDiovascular hEalth-Diet Study quality management system provides a framework for conducting a high-quality dietary intervention clinical trial.</p>","PeriodicalId":10685,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Trials","volume":" ","pages":"527-537"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143751500","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Developing a research coordinator workforce: A case study of a hospital and university collaboration. 发展研究协调人员队伍:医院和大学合作的案例研究。
IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL Pub Date : 2025-10-01 Epub Date: 2025-06-10 DOI: 10.1177/17407745251338574
April M Crawford, Steven L Arxer, James P LePage
{"title":"Developing a research coordinator workforce: A case study of a hospital and university collaboration.","authors":"April M Crawford, Steven L Arxer, James P LePage","doi":"10.1177/17407745251338574","DOIUrl":"10.1177/17407745251338574","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":10685,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Trials","volume":" ","pages":"632-634"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144257494","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Evaluating the use of text-message reminders and personalised text-message reminders on the return of participant questionnaires in trials, a systematic review and meta-analysis. 评估短信提醒和个性化短信提醒在试验参与者问卷返回中的使用情况,系统回顾和荟萃分析。
IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL Pub Date : 2025-10-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-12 DOI: 10.1177/17407745251320888
Laura Doherty, Catherine Arundel, Elizabeth Coleman, Ailish Byrne, Katherine Jones
<p><strong>Background: </strong>Randomised controlled trials are widely accepted as the gold standard research methodology for the evaluation of interventions. However, they often display poor participant retention. To prevent this, various participant interventions have been identified and evaluated through the use of studies within a trial. Two such interventions are participant short message service reminders (also known as text-messages) and personalised participant short message service reminders, designed to encourage a participant to return a study questionnaire. While previous studies within a trial have evaluated the effectiveness of these two retention strategies, trialists continue to spend both time and money on these strategies while the evidence remains inconclusive.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the use of short message service reminders with no short message service reminder and personalised short message service reminders with non-personalised short message service reminders, on participant retention. Eligible studies were identified through advanced searches of electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library) and hand-searching of alternative information sources. The review primary outcome was the proportion of study questionnaires returned for the individual study within a trial primary analysis time points.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine eligible studies within a trial were identified, of which four compared short message service versus no short message service and five compared personalised short message service versus non-personalised short message service. For those that compared personalised short message service versus non-personalised short message service, only three were deemed appropriate for meta-analysis. The primary outcome results for short message service versus no short message service concluded that short message service led to a statistically non-significant increase in the odds of study questionnaire return by 9% (odds ratio = 1.09, 95% confidence interval = 0.92 to 1.30). Similarly, comparison of personalised short message service versus non-personalised short message service concluded that personalised short message service caused a statistically non-significant increase in odds by 22% (odds ratio = 1.22, 95% confidence interval = 0.95 to 1.59).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The effectiveness of both short message service and personalised short message service as retention tools remains inconclusive and further study within a trial evaluations are required. However, as short message services are low in cost, easy to use and generally well accepted by participants, it is suggested that trialists adopt a pragmatic approach and utilise these reminders until further research is conducted. Given both the minimal addition in cost for studies already utilising short message service reminders and some evidence of effect, personalisation shoul
背景:随机对照试验被广泛接受为评价干预措施的金标准研究方法。然而,它们往往表现出较差的玩家留存率。为了防止这种情况,通过在试验中使用研究来确定和评估各种参与者干预措施。两种干预措施是参与者短信服务提醒(也称为文本消息)和个性化参与者短信服务提醒,旨在鼓励参与者返回研究问卷。虽然之前的试验研究已经评估了这两种留存策略的有效性,但试验人员继续在这些策略上花费时间和金钱,而证据仍然没有定论。方法:本系统回顾和荟萃分析比较了使用短信服务提醒与不使用短信服务提醒、个性化短信服务提醒与非个性化短信服务提醒的参与者留存率。通过电子数据库(MEDLINE、EMBASE和Cochrane Library)的高级检索和替代信息源的手工检索,确定了符合条件的研究。回顾的主要结局是在试验主要分析时间点内为单个研究返回的研究问卷的比例。结果:在一项试验中确定了9项符合条件的研究,其中4项比较了短信息服务与无短信息服务,5项比较了个性化短信息服务与非个性化短信息服务。对于那些比较个性化短信服务与非个性化短信服务的人来说,只有三个被认为适合进行元分析。短信服务组与无短信服务组的主要结局结果表明,短信服务导致研究问卷返回率增加9%(优势比= 1.09,95%可信区间= 0.92 ~ 1.30),统计学上无显著性差异。同样,个性化短信服务与非个性化短信服务的比较得出的结论是,个性化短信服务导致的几率增加了22%(优势比= 1.22,95%置信区间= 0.95至1.59),统计学上不显著。结论:短信服务和个性化短信服务作为挽留工具的有效性仍不确定,需要进一步的试验评估研究。然而,由于短信服务成本低,使用方便,并且普遍为参与者所接受,因此建议试用者采取务实的方法,在进一步的研究进行之前使用这些提醒。考虑到已经使用短信提醒服务的研究增加的成本最小,以及一些效果的证据,个性化也应该考虑在内。
{"title":"Evaluating the use of text-message reminders and personalised text-message reminders on the return of participant questionnaires in trials, a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Laura Doherty, Catherine Arundel, Elizabeth Coleman, Ailish Byrne, Katherine Jones","doi":"10.1177/17407745251320888","DOIUrl":"10.1177/17407745251320888","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background: &lt;/strong&gt;Randomised controlled trials are widely accepted as the gold standard research methodology for the evaluation of interventions. However, they often display poor participant retention. To prevent this, various participant interventions have been identified and evaluated through the use of studies within a trial. Two such interventions are participant short message service reminders (also known as text-messages) and personalised participant short message service reminders, designed to encourage a participant to return a study questionnaire. While previous studies within a trial have evaluated the effectiveness of these two retention strategies, trialists continue to spend both time and money on these strategies while the evidence remains inconclusive.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods: &lt;/strong&gt;This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the use of short message service reminders with no short message service reminder and personalised short message service reminders with non-personalised short message service reminders, on participant retention. Eligible studies were identified through advanced searches of electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library) and hand-searching of alternative information sources. The review primary outcome was the proportion of study questionnaires returned for the individual study within a trial primary analysis time points.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results: &lt;/strong&gt;Nine eligible studies within a trial were identified, of which four compared short message service versus no short message service and five compared personalised short message service versus non-personalised short message service. For those that compared personalised short message service versus non-personalised short message service, only three were deemed appropriate for meta-analysis. The primary outcome results for short message service versus no short message service concluded that short message service led to a statistically non-significant increase in the odds of study questionnaire return by 9% (odds ratio = 1.09, 95% confidence interval = 0.92 to 1.30). Similarly, comparison of personalised short message service versus non-personalised short message service concluded that personalised short message service caused a statistically non-significant increase in odds by 22% (odds ratio = 1.22, 95% confidence interval = 0.95 to 1.59).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusion: &lt;/strong&gt;The effectiveness of both short message service and personalised short message service as retention tools remains inconclusive and further study within a trial evaluations are required. However, as short message services are low in cost, easy to use and generally well accepted by participants, it is suggested that trialists adopt a pragmatic approach and utilise these reminders until further research is conducted. Given both the minimal addition in cost for studies already utilising short message service reminders and some evidence of effect, personalisation shoul","PeriodicalId":10685,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Trials","volume":" ","pages":"607-618"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143604142","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Identification and mitigation of a systematic analysis error in a multicenter dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry study. 多中心双能x射线吸收测定法研究中系统分析误差的识别和缓解。
IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL Pub Date : 2025-10-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-22 DOI: 10.1177/17407745251328257
Gayle M Lorenzi, Barbara H Braffett, Ionut Bebu, Victoria R Trapani, Jye-Yu C Backlund, Kaleigh Farrell, Rose A Gubitosi-Klug, Ann V Schwartz
<p><p>Background/AimsData integrity in multicenter and longitudinal studies requires implementation of standardized reproducible methods throughout the data collection, analysis, and reporting process. This requirement is heightened when results are shared with participants that may influence health care decisions. A quality assurance plan provides a framework for ongoing monitoring and mitigation strategies when errors occur.MethodsThe Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (1983-1993) and its follow-up study, the Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (1994-present), have characterized risk factors and long-term complications in a type 1 diabetes cohort followed for over 40 years. An ancillary study to assess bone mineral density was implemented across 27 sites, using one of two dual x-ray absorptiometry scanner types. Centrally generated reports were distributed to participants by the sites. A query from a site about results that were incongruent with a single participant's clinical history prompted reevaluation of this scan, revealing a systematic error in the reading of hip scans from one of the two scanner types. A mitigation plan was implemented to correct and communicate the errors to ensure participant safety, particularly among those originally identified as having low bone mineral density scores for whom antiresorptive treatment may have been initiated based on these results.ResultsThe error in the analysis of hip scans from the identified scanner type resulted in lower bone mineral density scores in scans requiring manual deletion of the ischium bone. Hip scans with original T-score ≤ -2.5 (n = 84) acquired on either scanner were reviewed, and reanalyzed if the error was detected. Fourteen scans were susceptible to this error and reanalyzed: nine scans were reclassified from osteoporosis to low bone mineral density, one from low to normal bone mineral density, and four were unchanged. All errors occurred on one scanner type. An integrated communication and intervention plan was implemented. The nine participants whose scans were reclassified from osteoporosis to low bone mineral density were contacted; five were using antiresorptive treatment, all of whom had other risk factors for fracture beyond these scan results. Review of all hip scans with a T-score > -2.5 (n = 371) using this scanner type identified 27 additional hip scans that required reanalysis and potential reclassification: 1 scan was reclassified from osteoporosis to low bone mineral density, 11 from low to normal bone mineral density, and 15 were unchanged.ConclusionThe impact of an analysis error on participant safety, specifically when the initiation of unnecessary treatment may result, necessitated implementation of a coordinated communication and mitigation plan across all clinical centers to ensure consistent messaging and accurate results are provided to participants and their local care providers. This framework may serve as a resource for othe
背景/目的多中心和纵向研究的数据完整性要求在整个数据收集、分析和报告过程中实施标准化的可重复方法。当与可能影响医疗保健决策的参与者分享结果时,这一要求更加突出。质量保证计划为发生错误时的持续监测和缓解策略提供了一个框架。方法糖尿病控制和并发症试验(1983-1993)及其随访研究糖尿病干预和并发症流行病学(1994-至今)对1型糖尿病队列随访40多年的危险因素和长期并发症进行了分析。一项辅助研究评估了27个地点的骨矿物质密度,使用两种双x线吸收仪扫描类型之一。中心生成的报告由各网站分发给参与者。来自网站的查询结果与单个参与者的临床病史不一致,促使对该扫描进行重新评估,揭示了两种扫描仪类型之一在读取髋关节扫描时的系统错误。实施了一项缓解计划,以纠正和传达错误,以确保参与者的安全,特别是那些最初被确定为骨密度评分低的人,他们可能已经根据这些结果开始了抗吸收治疗。结果所识别的扫描仪类型对髋关节扫描的分析误差导致需要手动删除坐骨骨的扫描中骨密度评分较低。回顾任意一台扫描仪上获得的原始t评分≤-2.5 (n = 84)的髋关节扫描,如果检测到错误,则重新分析。14次扫描易受此错误影响并重新分析:9次扫描从骨质疏松症重新分类为低骨密度,1次从低骨密度重新分类为正常骨密度,4次未改变。所有错误都发生在一个扫描仪类型上。实施了综合沟通和干预计划。联系了9名扫描结果从骨质疏松症重新分类为低骨密度的参与者;其中5例采用抗吸收治疗,所有患者除扫描结果外均存在其他骨折危险因素。回顾使用该扫描仪类型的所有t评分为> -2.5的髋关节扫描(n = 371),确定了27个需要重新分析和可能重新分类的髋关节扫描:1个扫描从骨质疏松症重新分类为低骨密度,11个从低骨密度重新分类为正常骨密度,15个未改变。分析错误对参与者安全的影响,特别是当可能导致不必要的治疗时,有必要在所有临床中心实施协调的沟通和缓解计划,以确保向参与者及其当地护理提供者提供一致的信息和准确的结果。该框架可作为其他临床研究的资源。
{"title":"Identification and mitigation of a systematic analysis error in a multicenter dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry study.","authors":"Gayle M Lorenzi, Barbara H Braffett, Ionut Bebu, Victoria R Trapani, Jye-Yu C Backlund, Kaleigh Farrell, Rose A Gubitosi-Klug, Ann V Schwartz","doi":"10.1177/17407745251328257","DOIUrl":"10.1177/17407745251328257","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Background/AimsData integrity in multicenter and longitudinal studies requires implementation of standardized reproducible methods throughout the data collection, analysis, and reporting process. This requirement is heightened when results are shared with participants that may influence health care decisions. A quality assurance plan provides a framework for ongoing monitoring and mitigation strategies when errors occur.MethodsThe Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (1983-1993) and its follow-up study, the Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (1994-present), have characterized risk factors and long-term complications in a type 1 diabetes cohort followed for over 40 years. An ancillary study to assess bone mineral density was implemented across 27 sites, using one of two dual x-ray absorptiometry scanner types. Centrally generated reports were distributed to participants by the sites. A query from a site about results that were incongruent with a single participant's clinical history prompted reevaluation of this scan, revealing a systematic error in the reading of hip scans from one of the two scanner types. A mitigation plan was implemented to correct and communicate the errors to ensure participant safety, particularly among those originally identified as having low bone mineral density scores for whom antiresorptive treatment may have been initiated based on these results.ResultsThe error in the analysis of hip scans from the identified scanner type resulted in lower bone mineral density scores in scans requiring manual deletion of the ischium bone. Hip scans with original T-score ≤ -2.5 (n = 84) acquired on either scanner were reviewed, and reanalyzed if the error was detected. Fourteen scans were susceptible to this error and reanalyzed: nine scans were reclassified from osteoporosis to low bone mineral density, one from low to normal bone mineral density, and four were unchanged. All errors occurred on one scanner type. An integrated communication and intervention plan was implemented. The nine participants whose scans were reclassified from osteoporosis to low bone mineral density were contacted; five were using antiresorptive treatment, all of whom had other risk factors for fracture beyond these scan results. Review of all hip scans with a T-score &gt; -2.5 (n = 371) using this scanner type identified 27 additional hip scans that required reanalysis and potential reclassification: 1 scan was reclassified from osteoporosis to low bone mineral density, 11 from low to normal bone mineral density, and 15 were unchanged.ConclusionThe impact of an analysis error on participant safety, specifically when the initiation of unnecessary treatment may result, necessitated implementation of a coordinated communication and mitigation plan across all clinical centers to ensure consistent messaging and accurate results are provided to participants and their local care providers. This framework may serve as a resource for othe","PeriodicalId":10685,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Trials","volume":" ","pages":"538-546"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12379604/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143971581","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
A randomized study comparing patient portal and email communications for trial recruitment. 一项比较患者门户和电子邮件通信的随机研究,用于试验招募。
IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL Pub Date : 2025-10-01 Epub Date: 2025-08-21 DOI: 10.1177/17407745251358259
Jeanette Y Ziegenfuss, Elanadora U Sour, Erica J Roelofs, Jennifer M Vesely, Karen L Margolis, Stephanie A Hooker
<p><p>BackgroundRecruitment is a necessary, yet challenging component to clinical trial implementation. Using intentional strategies to meet enrollment goals is important to ensure the recruited sample adequately reflects the intended study population. Outreach via electronic health record (EHR) patient portals is a promising strategy. While identifying potentially eligible individuals in the EHR is largely accepted as effective, little is known about the effectiveness of outreach via EHR compared to outreach via traditional electronic mail (email) communication given equivalent population identification strategies.MethodsThis study was conducted using recruitment data from one of four study locations participating in the LEAP study, a multi-site, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial studying the long-term use of phentermine on weight loss and blood pressure. Between May 2023 and February 2024, 17,989 potentially trial-eligible participants identified using EHR data were randomized to either portal or email recruitment communications. Outreach success was measured at six milestones between starting the self-screener and study randomization. Recruitment rates overall and by demographic subpopulation are reported at each milestone as a percent of total invited and as a percent of previous milestone completers. Multivariate analysis considers the moderating effect of demographics on the relative impact of communication type.ResultsOverall, 6.6% (n = 1191) completed the self-screener and 0.5% (n = 85) were randomized into the LEAP trial. Individuals randomized to patient portal communication were more likely to start the self-screener (Odds Ratio [OR]= 2.4 [2.12, 2.73], p < 0.0001) and complete the subsequent four steps, however there was no significant difference in the percent ultimately randomized into the study (OR = 1.43 [0.93, 2.21], p = 0.10). Moreover, when controlling for completion of the previous step, all subsequent milestone differences were no longer significant. Gender was the only significant moderating factor of all available participant characteristics, with women 2.92 ([2.48, 3.43], p < 0.001) and men 1.72 ([1.41, 2.12], p < 0.001) times more likely to respond to portal messages than email communications.ConclusionsInitial activation in study activities was higher in the patient portal group. Although this impact sustained itself across all but the final study milestone and resulted in absolute larger counts among those randomized to portal messages, there is no evidence that this choice will improve representation in biomedical research or the final study randomization rate overall. Therefore, these findings suggest using the portal strategy may lead to more effort without yield on interim steps by both the research team and the potential participants compared to email. Ultimately, the research team's approach may depend on organizational context and study topic, as some topics do not lend themselves to the less secure nature of
招募是临床试验实施的一个必要但具有挑战性的组成部分。使用有目的的策略来满足入学目标对于确保招募的样本充分反映预期的研究人群是很重要的。通过电子健康记录(EHR)患者门户进行外展是一种很有前途的策略。虽然在电子病历中识别潜在的合格个体在很大程度上被认为是有效的,但在相同的人群识别策略下,通过电子病历进行外展与通过传统电子邮件(电子邮件)进行外展相比,人们对其有效性知之甚少。方法:本研究采用来自LEAP研究的四个研究地点之一的招募数据进行,LEAP研究是一项多地点、双盲、安慰剂对照试验,研究长期使用芬特明对减肥和血压的影响。在2023年5月至2024年2月期间,使用电子病历数据确定的17,989名可能符合试验条件的参与者被随机分配到门户网站或电子邮件招聘通信中。在开始自我筛选和研究随机化之间,通过六个里程碑来衡量外展成功。在每个里程碑上报告总体招聘率和人口统计子人群的招聘率,占受邀总人数的百分比和前一个里程碑完成者的百分比。多变量分析考虑了人口统计学对传播类型相对影响的调节作用。结果总体而言,6.6% (n = 1191)的患者完成了自我筛查,0.5% (n = 85)的患者被随机纳入LEAP试验。随机分配到患者门静脉交流组的个体更有可能开始自我筛查(优势比[OR]= 2.4 [2.12, 2.73], p
{"title":"A randomized study comparing patient portal and email communications for trial recruitment.","authors":"Jeanette Y Ziegenfuss, Elanadora U Sour, Erica J Roelofs, Jennifer M Vesely, Karen L Margolis, Stephanie A Hooker","doi":"10.1177/17407745251358259","DOIUrl":"10.1177/17407745251358259","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;p&gt;BackgroundRecruitment is a necessary, yet challenging component to clinical trial implementation. Using intentional strategies to meet enrollment goals is important to ensure the recruited sample adequately reflects the intended study population. Outreach via electronic health record (EHR) patient portals is a promising strategy. While identifying potentially eligible individuals in the EHR is largely accepted as effective, little is known about the effectiveness of outreach via EHR compared to outreach via traditional electronic mail (email) communication given equivalent population identification strategies.MethodsThis study was conducted using recruitment data from one of four study locations participating in the LEAP study, a multi-site, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial studying the long-term use of phentermine on weight loss and blood pressure. Between May 2023 and February 2024, 17,989 potentially trial-eligible participants identified using EHR data were randomized to either portal or email recruitment communications. Outreach success was measured at six milestones between starting the self-screener and study randomization. Recruitment rates overall and by demographic subpopulation are reported at each milestone as a percent of total invited and as a percent of previous milestone completers. Multivariate analysis considers the moderating effect of demographics on the relative impact of communication type.ResultsOverall, 6.6% (n = 1191) completed the self-screener and 0.5% (n = 85) were randomized into the LEAP trial. Individuals randomized to patient portal communication were more likely to start the self-screener (Odds Ratio [OR]= 2.4 [2.12, 2.73], p &lt; 0.0001) and complete the subsequent four steps, however there was no significant difference in the percent ultimately randomized into the study (OR = 1.43 [0.93, 2.21], p = 0.10). Moreover, when controlling for completion of the previous step, all subsequent milestone differences were no longer significant. Gender was the only significant moderating factor of all available participant characteristics, with women 2.92 ([2.48, 3.43], p &lt; 0.001) and men 1.72 ([1.41, 2.12], p &lt; 0.001) times more likely to respond to portal messages than email communications.ConclusionsInitial activation in study activities was higher in the patient portal group. Although this impact sustained itself across all but the final study milestone and resulted in absolute larger counts among those randomized to portal messages, there is no evidence that this choice will improve representation in biomedical research or the final study randomization rate overall. Therefore, these findings suggest using the portal strategy may lead to more effort without yield on interim steps by both the research team and the potential participants compared to email. Ultimately, the research team's approach may depend on organizational context and study topic, as some topics do not lend themselves to the less secure nature of","PeriodicalId":10685,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Trials","volume":" ","pages":"597-606"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12373006/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144945739","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
From RAGs to riches: Utilizing large language models to write documents for clinical trials. 白手起家:利用大型语言模型为临床试验编写文档。
IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL Pub Date : 2025-10-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-27 DOI: 10.1177/17407745251320806
Nigel Markey, Ilyass El-Mansouri, Gaetan Rensonnet, Casper van Langen, Christoph Meier

Background/AimsClinical trials require numerous documents to be written: Protocols, consent forms, clinical study reports, and many others. Large language models offer the potential to rapidly generate first-draft versions of these documents; however, there are concerns about the quality of their output. Here, we report an evaluation of how good large language models are at generating sections of one such document, clinical trial protocols.MethodsUsing an off-the-shelf large language model, we generated protocol sections for a broad range of diseases and clinical trial phases. Each of these document sections we assessed across four dimensions: Clinical thinking and logic; Transparency and references; Medical and clinical terminology; and Content relevance and suitability. To improve performance, we used the retrieval-augmented generation method to enhance the large language model with accurate up-to-date information, including regulatory guidance documents and data from ClinicalTrials.gov. Using this retrieval-augmented generation large language model, we regenerated the same protocol sections and assessed them across the same four dimensions.ResultsWe find that the off-the-shelf large language model delivers reasonable results, especially when assessing content relevance and the correct use of medical and clinical terminology, with scores of over 80%. However, the off-the-shelf large language model shows limited performance in clinical thinking and logic and transparency and references, with assessment scores of ≈40% or less. The use of retrieval-augmented generation substantially improves the writing quality of the large language model, with clinical thinking and logic and transparency and references scores increasing to ≈80%. The retrieval-augmented generation method thus greatly improves the practical usability of large language models for clinical trial-related writing.DiscussionOur results suggest that hybrid large language model architectures, such as the retrieval-augmented generation method we utilized, offer strong potential for clinical trial-related writing, including a wide variety of documents. This is potentially transformative, since it addresses several major bottlenecks of drug development.

背景/目的:临床试验需要撰写大量文件:方案、同意表、临床研究报告等。大型语言模型提供了快速生成这些文档的初稿版本的潜力;然而,他们的产出质量令人担忧。在这里,我们报告了对大型语言模型在生成一个这样的文档(临床试验协议)的部分方面有多好的评估。方法:使用现成的大型语言模型,我们为广泛的疾病和临床试验阶段生成协议章节。我们从四个方面评估了这些文档的每个部分:临床思维和逻辑;透明度和参考资料;医学和临床术语;内容的相关性和适宜性。为了提高性能,我们使用检索增强生成方法,用准确的最新信息增强大型语言模型,包括监管指导文件和来自ClinicalTrials.gov的数据。使用这个检索增强生成大型语言模型,我们重新生成了相同的协议部分,并在相同的四个维度上对它们进行了评估。结果:我们发现现成的大语言模型提供了合理的结果,特别是在评估内容相关性和医学和临床术语的正确使用时,得分超过80%。然而,现成的大型语言模型在临床思维和逻辑以及透明度和参考方面的表现有限,评估分数约为40%或更低。检索增强生成的使用大大提高了大型语言模型的写作质量,临床思维和逻辑以及透明度和参考文献得分提高到≈80%。因此,检索增强生成方法大大提高了临床试验相关写作的大型语言模型的实际可用性。讨论:我们的结果表明,混合大型语言模型体系结构,如我们使用的检索增强生成方法,为临床试验相关的写作提供了强大的潜力,包括各种各样的文档。这是潜在的变革,因为它解决了药物开发的几个主要瓶颈。
{"title":"From RAGs to riches: Utilizing large language models to write documents for clinical trials.","authors":"Nigel Markey, Ilyass El-Mansouri, Gaetan Rensonnet, Casper van Langen, Christoph Meier","doi":"10.1177/17407745251320806","DOIUrl":"10.1177/17407745251320806","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Background/AimsClinical trials require numerous documents to be written: Protocols, consent forms, clinical study reports, and many others. Large language models offer the potential to rapidly generate first-draft versions of these documents; however, there are concerns about the quality of their output. Here, we report an evaluation of how good large language models are at generating sections of one such document, clinical trial protocols.MethodsUsing an off-the-shelf large language model, we generated protocol sections for a broad range of diseases and clinical trial phases. Each of these document sections we assessed across four dimensions: <i>Clinical thinking and logic; Transparency and references; Medical and clinical terminology</i>; and <i>Content relevance and suitability</i>. To improve performance, we used the retrieval-augmented generation method to enhance the large language model with accurate up-to-date information, including regulatory guidance documents and data from ClinicalTrials.gov. Using this retrieval-augmented generation large language model, we regenerated the same protocol sections and assessed them across the same four dimensions.ResultsWe find that the off-the-shelf large language model delivers reasonable results, especially when assessing <i>content relevance</i> and the <i>correct use of medical and clinical terminology</i>, with scores of over 80%. However, the off-the-shelf large language model shows limited performance in <i>clinical thinking and logic</i> and <i>transparency and references</i>, with assessment scores of ≈40% or less. The use of retrieval-augmented generation substantially improves the writing quality of the large language model, with <i>clinical thinking and logic</i> and <i>transparency and references</i> scores increasing to ≈80%. The retrieval-augmented generation method thus greatly improves the practical usability of large language models for clinical trial-related writing.DiscussionOur results suggest that hybrid large language model architectures, such as the retrieval-augmented generation method we utilized, offer strong potential for clinical trial-related writing, including a wide variety of documents. This is potentially transformative, since it addresses several major bottlenecks of drug development.</p>","PeriodicalId":10685,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Trials","volume":" ","pages":"626-631"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12476469/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143514403","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Causal inference in randomized trials with partial clustering. 部分聚类随机试验中的因果推断。
IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL Pub Date : 2025-10-01 Epub Date: 2025-05-02 DOI: 10.1177/17407745251333779
Joshua R Nugent, Elijah Kakande, Gabriel Chamie, Jane Kabami, Asiphas Owaraganise, Diane V Havlir, Moses Kamya, Laura B Balzer

Background: Participant dependence, if present, must be accounted for in the analysis of randomized trials. This dependence, also referred to as "clustering," can occur in one or more trial arms. This dependence may predate randomization or arise after randomization. We examine three trial designs: one "fully clustered" (where all participants are dependent within clusters or groups) and two "partially clustered" (where some participants are dependent within clusters and some participants are completely independent of all others).

Methods: For these three designs, we (1) use causal models to non-parametrically describe the data generating process and formalize the dependence in the observed data distribution; (2) develop a novel implementation of targeted minimum loss-based estimation for analysis; (3) evaluate the finite-sample performance of targeted minimum loss-based estimation and common alternatives via a simulation study; and (4) apply the methods to real-data from the SEARCH-IPT trial.

Results: We show that the two randomization schemes resulting in partially clustered trials have the same dependence structure, enabling use of the same statistical methods for estimation and inference of causal effects. Our novel targeted minimum loss-based estimation approach leverages covariate adjustment and machine learning to improve precision and facilitates estimation of a large set of causal effects. In simulations, we demonstrate that targeted minimum loss-based estimation achieves comparable or markedly higher statistical power than common alternatives for these partially clustered designs. Finally, application of targeted minimum loss-based estimation to real data from the SEARCH-IPT trial resulted in 20%-57% efficiency gains, demonstrating the real-world consequences of our proposed approach.ConclusionsPartially clustered trial analysis can be made more efficient by implementing targeted minimum loss-based estimation, assuming care is taken to account for the dependent nature of the observed data.

背景:在随机试验的分析中,如果存在受试者依赖,必须考虑到。这种依赖性,也称为“聚类”,可能发生在一个或多个试验组中。这种依赖性可能发生在随机化之前或随机化之后。我们研究了三种试验设计:一种是“完全聚类”(所有参与者都依赖于集群或组),另一种是“部分聚类”(一些参与者依赖于集群,一些参与者完全独立于其他所有参与者)。方法:对于这三个设计,我们(1)使用因果模型来非参数地描述数据生成过程,并形式化观测数据分布中的相关性;(2)开发一种新的基于目标最小损失的分析估计方法;(3)通过仿真研究评估目标最小损失估计和常见替代方案的有限样本性能;(4)将该方法应用于SEARCH-IPT试验的实际数据。结果:我们表明,导致部分聚类试验的两种随机化方案具有相同的依赖结构,可以使用相同的统计方法来估计和推断因果效应。我们新颖的目标最小损失估计方法利用协变量调整和机器学习来提高精度,并促进对大量因果效应的估计。在模拟中,我们证明了针对这些部分聚类设计的基于最小损失的目标估计实现了与普通替代方案相当或显着更高的统计功率。最后,将基于最小损失的目标估计应用于SEARCH-IPT试验的实际数据,效率提高了20%-57%,证明了我们提出的方法在现实世界中的效果。结论部分聚类试验分析可以通过实施有针对性的基于最小损失的估计来提高效率,前提是要注意考虑到观察数据的依赖性。
{"title":"Causal inference in randomized trials with partial clustering.","authors":"Joshua R Nugent, Elijah Kakande, Gabriel Chamie, Jane Kabami, Asiphas Owaraganise, Diane V Havlir, Moses Kamya, Laura B Balzer","doi":"10.1177/17407745251333779","DOIUrl":"10.1177/17407745251333779","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Participant dependence, if present, must be accounted for in the analysis of randomized trials. This dependence, also referred to as \"clustering,\" can occur in one or more trial arms. This dependence may predate randomization or arise after randomization. We examine three trial designs: one \"fully clustered\" (where all participants are dependent within clusters or groups) and two \"partially clustered\" (where some participants are dependent within clusters and some participants are completely independent of all others).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>For these three designs, we (1) use causal models to non-parametrically describe the data generating process and formalize the dependence in the observed data distribution; (2) develop a novel implementation of targeted minimum loss-based estimation for analysis; (3) evaluate the finite-sample performance of targeted minimum loss-based estimation and common alternatives via a simulation study; and (4) apply the methods to real-data from the SEARCH-IPT trial.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We show that the two randomization schemes resulting in partially clustered trials have the same dependence structure, enabling use of the same statistical methods for estimation and inference of causal effects. Our novel targeted minimum loss-based estimation approach leverages covariate adjustment and machine learning to improve precision and facilitates estimation of a large set of causal effects. In simulations, we demonstrate that targeted minimum loss-based estimation achieves comparable or markedly higher statistical power than common alternatives for these partially clustered designs. Finally, application of targeted minimum loss-based estimation to real data from the SEARCH-IPT trial resulted in 20%-57% efficiency gains, demonstrating the real-world consequences of our proposed approach.ConclusionsPartially clustered trial analysis can be made more efficient by implementing targeted minimum loss-based estimation, assuming care is taken to account for the dependent nature of the observed data.</p>","PeriodicalId":10685,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Trials","volume":" ","pages":"547-558"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12355196/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143989232","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Hybrid sample size calculations for cluster randomised trials using assurance. 使用保证的聚类随机试验的混合样本量计算。
IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL Pub Date : 2025-10-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-11 DOI: 10.1177/17407745241312635
S Faye Williamson, Svetlana V Tishkovskaya, Kevin J Wilson

Background/aims: Sample size determination for cluster randomised trials is challenging because it requires robust estimation of the intra-cluster correlation coefficient. Typically, the sample size is chosen to provide a certain level of power to reject the null hypothesis in a two-sample hypothesis test. This relies on the minimal clinically important difference and estimates for the overall standard deviation, the intra-cluster correlation coefficient and, if cluster sizes are assumed to be unequal, the coefficient of variation of the cluster size. Varying any of these parameters can have a strong effect on the required sample size. In particular, it is very sensitive to small differences in the intra-cluster correlation coefficient. A relevant intra-cluster correlation coefficient estimate is often not available, or the available estimate is imprecise due to being based on studies with low numbers of clusters. If the intra-cluster correlation coefficient value used in the power calculation is far from the unknown true value, this could lead to trials which are substantially over- or under-powered.

Methods: In this article, we propose a hybrid approach using Bayesian assurance to determine the sample size for a cluster randomised trial in combination with a frequentist analysis. Assurance is an alternative to traditional power, which incorporates the uncertainty on key parameters through a prior distribution. We suggest specifying prior distributions for the overall standard deviation, intra-cluster correlation coefficient and coefficient of variation of the cluster size, while still utilising the minimal clinically important difference. We illustrate the approach through the design of a cluster randomised trial in post-stroke incontinence and compare the results to those obtained from a standard power calculation.

Results: We show that assurance can be used to calculate a sample size based on an elicited prior distribution for the intra-cluster correlation coefficient, whereas a power calculation discards all of the information in the prior except for a single point estimate. Results show that this approach can avoid misspecifying sample sizes when the prior medians for the intra-cluster correlation coefficient are very similar, but the underlying prior distributions exhibit quite different behaviour. Incorporating uncertainty on all three of the nuisance parameters, rather than only on the intra-cluster correlation coefficient, does not notably increase the required sample size.

Conclusion: Assurance provides a better understanding of the probability of success of a trial given a particular minimal clinically important difference and can be used instead of power to produce sample sizes that are more robust to parameter uncertainty. This is especially useful when there is difficulty obtaining reliable parameter estimates.

背景/目的:集群随机试验的样本量确定具有挑战性,因为它需要对集群内相关系数进行稳健估计。通常,在双样本假设检验中,选择样本量是为了提供一定程度的功率来拒绝零假设。这依赖于最小的临床重要差异和对总体标准差、簇内相关系数的估计,如果假设簇大小不等,则依赖于簇大小的变异系数。改变这些参数中的任何一个都会对所需的样本量产生很大的影响。特别是,它对簇内相关系数的微小差异非常敏感。相关的簇内相关系数估计通常是不可用的,或者由于基于较少簇数的研究,可用的估计是不精确的。如果功率计算中使用的簇内相关系数值与未知的真实值相差甚远,则可能导致试验功率过高或过低。方法:在本文中,我们提出了一种混合方法,使用贝叶斯保证来确定与频率分析相结合的聚类随机试验的样本量。保证是传统电力的替代方案,它通过先验分布将关键参数的不确定性纳入其中。我们建议指定总体标准差、簇内相关系数和簇大小变异系数的先验分布,同时仍然利用最小的临床重要差异。我们通过设计卒中后尿失禁的聚类随机试验来说明该方法,并将结果与标准功率计算结果进行比较。结果:我们表明,保证可以用来计算样本大小基于一个引出的先验分布的簇内相关系数,而功率计算丢弃所有的信息在先验中,除了一个单点估计。结果表明,当簇内相关系数的先验中位数非常相似时,该方法可以避免错误指定样本量,但潜在的先验分布表现出完全不同的行为。将不确定性纳入所有三个干扰参数,而不仅仅是集群内相关系数,并没有显着增加所需的样本量。结论:保证可以更好地理解给定最小临床重要差异的试验成功概率,并且可以代替功率来产生对参数不确定性更稳健的样本量。当难以获得可靠的参数估计时,这尤其有用。
{"title":"Hybrid sample size calculations for cluster randomised trials using assurance.","authors":"S Faye Williamson, Svetlana V Tishkovskaya, Kevin J Wilson","doi":"10.1177/17407745241312635","DOIUrl":"10.1177/17407745241312635","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/aims: </strong>Sample size determination for cluster randomised trials is challenging because it requires robust estimation of the intra-cluster correlation coefficient. Typically, the sample size is chosen to provide a certain level of power to reject the null hypothesis in a two-sample hypothesis test. This relies on the minimal clinically important difference and estimates for the overall standard deviation, the intra-cluster correlation coefficient and, if cluster sizes are assumed to be unequal, the coefficient of variation of the cluster size. Varying any of these parameters can have a strong effect on the required sample size. In particular, it is very sensitive to small differences in the intra-cluster correlation coefficient. A relevant intra-cluster correlation coefficient estimate is often not available, or the available estimate is imprecise due to being based on studies with low numbers of clusters. If the intra-cluster correlation coefficient value used in the power calculation is far from the unknown true value, this could lead to trials which are substantially over- or under-powered.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this article, we propose a hybrid approach using Bayesian assurance to determine the sample size for a cluster randomised trial in combination with a frequentist analysis. Assurance is an alternative to traditional power, which incorporates the uncertainty on key parameters through a prior distribution. We suggest specifying prior distributions for the overall standard deviation, intra-cluster correlation coefficient and coefficient of variation of the cluster size, while still utilising the minimal clinically important difference. We illustrate the approach through the design of a cluster randomised trial in post-stroke incontinence and compare the results to those obtained from a standard power calculation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We show that assurance can be used to calculate a sample size based on an elicited prior distribution for the intra-cluster correlation coefficient, whereas a power calculation discards all of the information in the prior except for a single point estimate. Results show that this approach can avoid misspecifying sample sizes when the prior medians for the intra-cluster correlation coefficient are very similar, but the underlying prior distributions exhibit quite different behaviour. Incorporating uncertainty on all three of the nuisance parameters, rather than only on the intra-cluster correlation coefficient, does not notably increase the required sample size.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Assurance provides a better understanding of the probability of success of a trial given a particular minimal clinically important difference and can be used instead of power to produce sample sizes that are more robust to parameter uncertainty. This is especially useful when there is difficulty obtaining reliable parameter estimates.</p>","PeriodicalId":10685,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Trials","volume":" ","pages":"517-526"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12476461/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143398464","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Building a professionally recognised clinical trial workforce: Is it time for an education and accreditation strategy? 建立一支专业认可的临床试验队伍:是时候实施教育和认证战略了吗?
IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL Pub Date : 2025-10-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-27 DOI: 10.1177/17407745251328287
Simone Spark, Prudence Perry, Thobekile Mthethwa-Pitt, Dragan Ilic, Anne Woollett, Sophia Zoungas, Marina Skiba

Evidence-based medicine relies heavily on well-conducted clinical trials. Australia lacks a discipline-specific education pathway to provide the specialist skills necessary to conduct clinical trials to the highest standards. Unlike allied health professionals, clinical trialists who currently possess the specialist skills to conduct clinical trials do not receive professional recognition. The National Health and Medical Research Council defines 'clinical trialist' to include site staff as well as investigators. In this perspective piece, we explore the importance of discipline-specific education in creating a job-ready workforce of clinical trialists; the need for recognition of clinical trialists as an allied health profession in concert with their existing medical, nursing and other professional qualifications and outline a proposed specialist education and accreditation strategy.

循证医学在很大程度上依赖于良好的临床试验。澳大利亚缺乏针对特定学科的教育途径,以提供进行最高标准临床试验所需的专业技能。与专职医疗专业人员不同,目前拥有进行临床试验的专业技能的临床试验人员不获得专业认可。国家健康和医学研究委员会将“临床试验人员”定义为包括现场工作人员和调查人员。在这篇透视文章中,我们探讨了特定学科教育在培养临床试验人员的就业准备方面的重要性;需要将临床试验医师视为专职医疗专业,以配合他们现有的医疗、护理和其他专业资格,并概述建议的专科教育和认证策略。
{"title":"Building a professionally recognised clinical trial workforce: Is it time for an education and accreditation strategy?","authors":"Simone Spark, Prudence Perry, Thobekile Mthethwa-Pitt, Dragan Ilic, Anne Woollett, Sophia Zoungas, Marina Skiba","doi":"10.1177/17407745251328287","DOIUrl":"10.1177/17407745251328287","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Evidence-based medicine relies heavily on well-conducted clinical trials. Australia lacks a discipline-specific education pathway to provide the specialist skills necessary to conduct clinical trials to the highest standards. Unlike allied health professionals, clinical trialists who currently possess the specialist skills to conduct clinical trials do not receive professional recognition. The National Health and Medical Research Council defines 'clinical trialist' to include site staff as well as investigators. In this perspective piece, we explore the importance of discipline-specific education in creating a job-ready workforce of clinical trialists; the need for recognition of clinical trialists as an allied health profession in concert with their existing medical, nursing and other professional qualifications and outline a proposed specialist education and accreditation strategy.</p>","PeriodicalId":10685,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Trials","volume":" ","pages":"511-516"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12476468/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143718174","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
Clinical Trials
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1