• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

试验方法学研究议程:优先事项设定活动的结果

The trials methodological research agenda: results from a priority setting exercise.

作者信息

Tudur Smith Catrin, Hickey Helen, Clarke Mike, Blazeby Jane, Williamson Paula

机构信息

North West Hub for Trials Methodology Research, Department of Biostatistics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.

出版信息

Trials. 2014 Jan 23;15:32. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-32.

DOI:10.1186/1745-6215-15-32
PMID:24456928
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3904160/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Research into the methods used in the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of clinical trials is essential to ensure that effective methods are available and that clinical decisions made using results from trials are based on the best available evidence, which is reliable and robust.

METHODS

An on-line Delphi survey of 48 UK Clinical Research Collaboration registered Clinical Trials Units (CTUs) was undertaken. During round one, CTU Directors were asked to identify important topics that require methodological research. During round two, their opinion about the level of importance of each topic was recorded, and during round three, they were asked to review the group's average opinion and revise their previous opinion if appropriate. Direct reminders were sent to maximise the number of responses at each round. Results are summarised using descriptive methods.

RESULTS

Forty one (85%) CTU Directors responded to at least one round of the Delphi process: 25 (52%) responded in round one, 32 (67%) responded in round two, 24 (50%) responded in round three. There were only 12 (25%) who responded to all three rounds and 18 (38%) who responded to both rounds two and three. Consensus was achieved amongst CTU Directors that the top three priorities for trials methodological research were 'Research into methods to boost recruitment in trials' (considered the highest priority), 'Methods to minimise attrition' and 'Choosing appropriate outcomes to measure'. Fifty other topics were included in the list of priorities and consensus was reached that two topics, 'Radiotherapy study designs' and 'Low carbon trials', were not priorities.

CONCLUSIONS

This priority setting exercise has identified the research topics felt to be most important to the key stakeholder group of Directors of UKCRC registered CTUs. The use of robust methodology to identify these priorities will help ensure that this work informs the trials methodological research agenda, with a focus on topics that will have most impact and relevance.

摘要

背景

对临床试验的设计、实施、分析和报告所采用的方法进行研究至关重要,以确保有有效的方法可用,并且基于试验结果做出的临床决策是基于最佳可得证据,即可靠且有力的证据。

方法

对英国临床研究协作组织注册的48个临床试验单位(CTU)进行了在线德尔菲调查。在第一轮中,要求CTU主任确定需要进行方法学研究的重要主题。在第二轮中,记录他们对每个主题重要性水平的看法,在第三轮中,要求他们审查小组的平均意见,并在适当时修改他们之前的意见。发送直接提醒以最大限度地提高每一轮的回复数量。结果采用描述性方法进行总结。

结果

41名(85%)CTU主任至少回复了一轮德尔菲过程:25名(52%)在第一轮回复,32名(67%)在第二轮回复,24名(50%)在第三轮回复。只有12名(25%)回复了所有三轮,18名(38%)回复了第二轮和第三轮。CTU主任们达成共识,试验方法学研究的前三大优先事项是“提高试验招募率的方法研究”(被认为是最高优先事项)、“减少损耗的方法”和“选择合适的测量结果”。另外50个主题也被列入优先事项清单,并且达成共识,“放射治疗研究设计”和“低碳试验”这两个主题不是优先事项。

结论

本次优先级设定活动确定了英国临床研究协作组织注册的CTU主任这一关键利益相关者群体认为最重要的研究主题。使用稳健的方法来确定这些优先事项将有助于确保这项工作为试验方法学研究议程提供信息,重点关注最具影响力和相关性的主题。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/192b/3904160/ac89dcc23184/1745-6215-15-32-2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/192b/3904160/688e5f0a6c0d/1745-6215-15-32-1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/192b/3904160/ac89dcc23184/1745-6215-15-32-2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/192b/3904160/688e5f0a6c0d/1745-6215-15-32-1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/192b/3904160/ac89dcc23184/1745-6215-15-32-2.jpg

相似文献

1
The trials methodological research agenda: results from a priority setting exercise.试验方法学研究议程:优先事项设定活动的结果
Trials. 2014 Jan 23;15:32. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-32.
2
Identifying research priorities for effective retention strategies in clinical trials.确定临床试验中有效保留策略的研究重点。
Trials. 2017 Aug 31;18(1):406. doi: 10.1186/s13063-017-2132-z.
3
Global health trials methodological research agenda: results from a priority setting exercise.全球卫生试验方法学研究议程:优先事项设定工作的结果。
Trials. 2018 Feb 5;19(1):48. doi: 10.1186/s13063-018-2440-y.
4
What are the main inefficiencies in trial conduct: a survey of UKCRC registered clinical trials units in the UK.试验实施中的主要低效因素有哪些:对英国UKCRC注册的临床试验单位的一项调查。
Trials. 2018 Jan 8;19(1):15. doi: 10.1186/s13063-017-2378-5.
5
A new trial monitoring plan (TMP) template for clinical trials: output from a Delphi process.一种新的临床试验监测计划(TMP)模板:德尔菲流程的输出结果。
Trials. 2024 Nov 9;25(1):748. doi: 10.1186/s13063-024-08601-z.
6
Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative: protocol for an international Delphi study to achieve consensus on how to select outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a 'core outcome set'.有效性试验核心结局指标(COMET)计划:一项国际德尔菲研究的方案,旨在就如何为“核心结局集”中包含的结局选择结局测量工具达成共识。
Trials. 2014 Jun 25;15:247. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-247.
7
Establishing a set of research priorities in care homes for older people in the UK: a modified Delphi consensus study with care home staff.确定英国养老院老年人护理的一系列研究重点:一项与养老院工作人员开展的改良德尔菲共识研究
Age Ageing. 2017 Mar 1;46(2):284-290. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afw204.
8
Priorities for methodological research on patient and public involvement in clinical trials: A modified Delphi process.患者和公众参与临床试验的方法学研究重点:改良 Delphi 法。
Health Expect. 2017 Dec;20(6):1401-1410. doi: 10.1111/hex.12583. Epub 2017 Jun 15.
9
Development of a core outcome set for effectiveness trials aimed at optimising prescribing in older adults in care homes.针对疗养院中老年人优化处方的有效性试验核心结局集的制定。
Trials. 2017 Apr 12;18(1):175. doi: 10.1186/s13063-017-1915-6.
10
Identifying a Core Domain Set to Assess Psoriasis in Clinical Trials.确定用于评估临床试验中银屑病的核心领域集。
JAMA Dermatol. 2018 Oct 1;154(10):1137-1144. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2018.1165.

引用本文的文献

1
Can a Public and Patient Involvement (PPI) Informed Participant Information Leaflet (PIL) Improve Trial Recruitment, Retention, and Quality of Decision Making? Results of a Randomised Controlled Double-Blind Study Within a Trial (SWAT).一份由公众和患者参与(PPI)提供信息的患者信息传单(PIL)能否改善试验招募、保留率和决策质量?一项试验中的随机对照双盲研究(SWAT)结果。
Health Expect. 2025 Jun;28(3):e70321. doi: 10.1111/hex.70321.
2
Research assistants' experiences recruiting patients with psychosis into clinical trials: a qualitative study.研究助理招募精神病患者参与临床试验的经历:一项定性研究。
Trials. 2025 May 30;26(1):180. doi: 10.1186/s13063-025-08882-y.
3

本文引用的文献

1
Identifying and prioritising gaps in colorectal cancer trials research in Australia.澳大利亚结直肠癌临床试验研究中的差距识别与优先排序。
Med J Aust. 2012 Nov 5;197(9):507-11. doi: 10.5694/mja12.10623.
2
Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to consider.制定临床试验核心结局集:需要考虑的问题。
Trials. 2012 Aug 6;13:132. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-13-132.
3
Core outcome domains for controlled trials and clinical recordkeeping in eczema: international multiperspective Delphi consensus process.用于湿疹临床试验和临床记录的核心结局领域:国际多视角德尔菲共识过程。
Planning for successful participant recruitment and retention in trials of behavioural interventions: Feasibility randomised controlled trial of the Wrapped intervention.
行为干预试验中成功招募和留住参与者的规划:Wrapped干预的可行性随机对照试验
PLOS Digit Health. 2025 May 29;4(5):e0000875. doi: 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000875. eCollection 2025 May.
4
Participant and trial characteristics reported in predictive analyses of trial attrition: an umbrella review of systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials across multiple conditions.在试验损耗的预测分析中报告的参与者和试验特征:对多种情况下随机对照试验系统评价的伞状综述
Trials. 2025 Mar 12;26(1):84. doi: 10.1186/s13063-025-08794-x.
5
Participant recruitment and retention in randomised controlled trials of melanoma surveillance: A scoping review.黑色素瘤监测随机对照试验中的参与者招募与保留:一项范围综述。
Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2025 Feb 16;44:101461. doi: 10.1016/j.conctc.2025.101461. eCollection 2025 Apr.
6
The need for further guidance on the handling of multiple outcomes in randomized controlled trials: a scoping review of the methodological literature.随机对照试验中多结局处理的进一步指导需求:方法学文献的范围综述
J Clin Epidemiol. 2025 May;181:111724. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2025.111724. Epub 2025 Feb 17.
7
Identifying Research Priorities for Cognition in CKD: A Delphi Study.确定慢性肾脏病认知方面的研究重点:一项德尔菲研究。
Kidney360. 2025 May 1;6(5):739-753. doi: 10.34067/KID.0000000708. Epub 2025 Jan 24.
8
The role of healthcare professionals' communication in trial participation decisions: a qualitative investigation of recruitment consultations and patient interviews across three RCTs.医疗保健专业人员的沟通在试验参与决策中的作用:对三项随机对照试验中的招募咨询和患者访谈进行的定性调查
Trials. 2024 Dec 18;25(1):829. doi: 10.1186/s13063-024-08656-y.
9
A study within a trial (SWAT) of clinical trial feasibility and barriers to recruitment in the United Kingdom - the CapaCiTY programme experience.一项在英国进行的临床试验可行性和招募障碍的研究(SWAT)——CapaCiTY 计划的经验。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2024 Nov 15;24(1):282. doi: 10.1186/s12874-024-02395-z.
10
Participants' perspectives of being recruited into a randomised trial of a weight loss intervention before colorectal cancer surgery: a qualitative interview study.参与结直肠癌手术前减肥干预随机试验招募的参与者观点:定性访谈研究。
BMC Cancer. 2024 Jul 5;24(1):802. doi: 10.1186/s12885-024-12464-7.
J Invest Dermatol. 2011 Mar;131(3):623-30. doi: 10.1038/jid.2010.303. Epub 2010 Oct 14.
4
What outcomes from pharmacologic treatments are important to people with rheumatoid arthritis? Creating the basis of a patient core set.药物治疗的哪些结果对类风湿关节炎患者重要?构建患者核心数据集的基础。
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2010 May;62(5):640-6. doi: 10.1002/acr.20034.
5
User testing and stakeholder feedback contributed to the development of understandable and useful Summary of Findings tables for Cochrane reviews.用户测试和利益相关者的反馈有助于为 Cochrane 综述开发出易于理解和有用的发现摘要表。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2010 Jun;63(6):607-19. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.12.013.
6
An official American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society statement: asthma control and exacerbations: standardizing endpoints for clinical asthma trials and clinical practice.美国胸科学会/欧洲呼吸学会官方声明:哮喘控制与加重:规范临床哮喘试验及临床实践的终点指标
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2009 Jul 1;180(1):59-99. doi: 10.1164/rccm.200801-060ST.
7
OMERACT: an international initiative to improve outcome measurement in rheumatology.OMERACT:一项旨在改善风湿病疗效评估的国际倡议。
Trials. 2007 Nov 26;8:38. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-8-38.
8
A consensus development approach to define national research priorities in bone metastases: proceedings from NCIC CTG workshop.一种用于确定骨转移瘤国家研究重点的共识发展方法:NCIC CTG研讨会会议记录
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2003 Dec;15(8):496-9. doi: 10.1016/j.clon.2003.07.004.
9
Outcomes from the Patient Perspective Workshop at OMERACT 6.第六届国际骨关节炎研究学会(OMERACT)患者视角研讨会的成果。
J Rheumatol. 2003 Apr;30(4):868-72.
10
Consensus methods for medical and health services research.医学与卫生服务研究的共识方法。
BMJ. 1995 Aug 5;311(7001):376-80. doi: 10.1136/bmj.311.7001.376.