Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, 220 W Main St., Suite 720A, Durham, NC, 27705, USA.
Duke Clinical Research Institute, 2400 Pratt St., Durham, NC, 27710, USA.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017 Sep 18;17(1):144. doi: 10.1186/s12874-017-0420-7.
BACKGROUND: The clinical research enterprise is not producing the evidence decision makers arguably need in a timely and cost effective manner; research currently involves the use of labor-intensive parallel systems that are separate from clinical care. The emergence of pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) poses a possible solution: these large-scale trials are embedded within routine clinical care and often involve cluster randomization of hospitals, clinics, primary care providers, etc. Interventions can be implemented by health system personnel through usual communication channels and quality improvement infrastructure, and data collected as part of routine clinical care. However, experience with these trials is nascent and best practices regarding design operational, analytic, and reporting methodologies are undeveloped. METHODS: To strengthen the national capacity to implement cost-effective, large-scale PCTs, the Common Fund of the National Institutes of Health created the Health Care Systems Research Collaboratory (Collaboratory) to support the design, execution, and dissemination of a series of demonstration projects using a pragmatic research design. RESULTS: In this article, we will describe the Collaboratory, highlight some of the challenges encountered and solutions developed thus far, and discuss remaining barriers and opportunities for large-scale evidence generation using PCTs. CONCLUSION: A planning phase is critical, and even with careful planning, new challenges arise during execution; comparisons between arms can be complicated by unanticipated changes. Early and ongoing engagement with both health care system leaders and front-line clinicians is critical for success. There is also marked uncertainty when applying existing ethical and regulatory frameworks to PCTS, and using existing electronic health records for data capture adds complexity.
背景:临床研究行业未能及时且经济有效地提供决策者所需的证据;目前的研究涉及使用与临床护理分离的劳动密集型并行系统。实用临床试验(PCTs)的出现提供了一种可能的解决方案:这些大规模试验嵌入常规临床护理中,通常涉及医院、诊所、初级保健提供者等的集群随机分组。干预措施可以通过卫生系统人员通过常规沟通渠道和质量改进基础设施来实施,并通过常规临床护理收集数据。然而,这些试验的经验尚处于起步阶段,关于设计、操作、分析和报告方法的最佳实践尚未开发。
方法:为了加强实施具有成本效益的大规模实用临床试验的国家能力,美国国立卫生研究院共同基金创建了医疗保健系统研究协作中心(协作中心),以支持使用实用研究设计进行一系列示范项目的设计、执行和传播。
结果:在本文中,我们将描述协作中心,重点介绍迄今为止遇到的一些挑战和开发的解决方案,并讨论使用实用临床试验进行大规模证据生成的剩余障碍和机会。
结论:规划阶段至关重要,即使进行了仔细的规划,在执行过程中也会出现新的挑战;由于意外的变化,臂之间的比较可能会变得复杂。与医疗保健系统领导者和一线临床医生的早期和持续参与对于成功至关重要。在将现有的伦理和监管框架应用于 PCTs 时也存在明显的不确定性,并且使用现有的电子健康记录进行数据捕获会增加复杂性。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017-9-18
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2017-9-1
Early Hum Dev. 2020-11
Healthc (Amst). 2015-7-29
Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2025-4-11
BMC Prim Care. 2025-4-23
Learn Health Syst. 2025-4-10
Contemp Clin Trials. 2025-5
J Am Stat Assoc. 2024
J Clin Transl Sci. 2024-10-17
EGEMS (Wash DC). 2017-6-12
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2017-9-1
AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2016
Healthc (Amst). 2015-7-29
AMIA Jt Summits Transl Sci Proc. 2016-7-20
N Engl J Med. 2016-8-4
J Comp Eff Res. 2016-8