Suppr超能文献

阶梯式试验中的缺失环节:一项关于关键利益相关者对确证性试验中适应性设计使用观点的定性研究

Missing steps in a staircase: a qualitative study of the perspectives of key stakeholders on the use of adaptive designs in confirmatory trials.

作者信息

Dimairo Munyaradzi, Boote Jonathan, Julious Steven A, Nicholl Jonathan P, Todd Susan

机构信息

School of Health and Related Research, Regent Court, University of Sheffield, 30 Regent Street, S1 4DA, Sheffield, UK.

Centre for Research in Primary and Community Care, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, AL109AB, Hertfordshire, UK.

出版信息

Trials. 2015 Sep 28;16:430. doi: 10.1186/s13063-015-0958-9.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Despite the promising benefits of adaptive designs (ADs), their routine use, especially in confirmatory trials, is lagging behind the prominence given to them in the statistical literature. Much of the previous research to understand barriers and potential facilitators to the use of ADs has been driven from a pharmaceutical drug development perspective, with little focus on trials in the public sector. In this paper, we explore key stakeholders' experiences, perceptions and views on barriers and facilitators to the use of ADs in publicly funded confirmatory trials.

METHODS

Semi-structured, in-depth interviews of key stakeholders in clinical trials research (CTU directors, funding board and panel members, statisticians, regulators, chief investigators, data monitoring committee members and health economists) were conducted through telephone or face-to-face sessions, predominantly in the UK. We purposively selected participants sequentially to optimise maximum variation in views and experiences. We employed the framework approach to analyse the qualitative data.

RESULTS

We interviewed 27 participants. We found some of the perceived barriers to be: lack of knowledge and experience coupled with paucity of case studies, lack of applied training, degree of reluctance to use ADs, lack of bridge funding and time to support design work, lack of statistical expertise, some anxiety about the impact of early trial stopping on researchers' employment contracts, lack of understanding of acceptable scope of ADs and when ADs are appropriate, and statistical and practical complexities. Reluctance to use ADs seemed to be influenced by: therapeutic area, unfamiliarity, concerns about their robustness in decision-making and acceptability of findings to change practice, perceived complexities and proposed type of AD, among others.

CONCLUSIONS

There are still considerable multifaceted, individual and organisational obstacles to be addressed to improve uptake, and successful implementation of ADs when appropriate. Nevertheless, inferred positive change in attitudes and receptiveness towards the appropriate use of ADs by public funders are supportive and are a stepping stone for the future utilisation of ADs by researchers.

摘要

背景

尽管适应性设计(ADs)具有诸多潜在益处,但其常规应用,尤其是在确证性试验中的应用,仍落后于统计文献中对它们的重视程度。此前,为了解ADs使用的障碍和潜在促进因素所开展的诸多研究,多是从药物研发的角度进行的,很少关注公共部门的试验。在本文中,我们探讨了关键利益相关者在公共资助的确证性试验中使用ADs的障碍和促进因素方面的经验、看法和观点。

方法

通过电话或面对面访谈,对临床试验研究中的关键利益相关者(临床试验单位主任、资助委员会和小组成员、统计学家、监管机构、首席研究员、数据监测委员会成员和卫生经济学家)进行了半结构化的深入访谈,主要在英国进行。我们有目的地依次选择参与者,以优化观点和经验的最大差异。我们采用框架方法来分析定性数据。

结果

我们采访了27名参与者。我们发现一些被认为的障碍包括:缺乏知识和经验,同时案例研究匮乏;缺乏应用培训;使用ADs的意愿程度低;缺乏过渡资金和支持设计工作的时间;缺乏统计专业知识;对早期试验停止对研究人员雇佣合同的影响存在一些担忧;对ADs的可接受范围以及何时适用ADs缺乏理解;以及统计和实际操作的复杂性。使用ADs的意愿似乎受到以下因素影响:治疗领域、不熟悉程度、对其在决策中的稳健性以及研究结果改变实践的可接受性的担忧、感知到的复杂性以及提议的AD类型等。

结论

要提高ADs的采用率并在适当的时候成功实施,仍有相当多的多方面、个人和组织障碍需要解决。尽管如此,公共资助者对适当使用ADs的态度和接受度的积极变化是有支持作用的,是研究人员未来使用ADs的一块基石。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

4
More multiarm randomised trials of superiority are needed.需要更多的多臂优效性随机试验。
Lancet. 2014 Jul 26;384(9940):283-4. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61122-3.
6
Adaptive clinical trial design.适应性临床试验设计。
Annu Rev Med. 2014;65:405-15. doi: 10.1146/annurev-med-092012-112310.

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