Hayward Kathryn S, Dalton Emily J, Barth Jessica, Brady Marian, Cherney Leora R, Churilov Leonid, Clarkson Andrew N, Dawson Jesse, Dukelow Sean P, Feys Peter, Hackett Maree, Zeiler Steve R, Lang Catherine E
The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Providence VA Medical Center, Providence, RI, USA.
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2024 Jan;38(1):30-40. doi: 10.1177/15459683231209162. Epub 2023 Oct 14.
Control comparator selection is a critical trial design issue. Preclinical and clinical investigators who are doing trials of stroke recovery and rehabilitation interventions must carefully consider the appropriateness and relevance of their chosen control comparator as the benefit of an experimental intervention is established relative to a comparator. Establishing a strong rationale for a selected comparator improves the integrity of the trial and validity of its findings. This Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable (SRRR) taskforce used a graph theory voting system to rank the importance and ease of addressing challenges during control comparator design. "Identifying appropriate type of control" was ranked easy to address and very important, "variability in usual care" was ranked hard to address and of low importance, and "understanding the content of the control and how it differs from the experimental intervention" was ranked very important but not easy to address. The CONtrol DeSIGN (CONSIGN) decision support tool was developed to address the identified challenges and enhance comparator selection, description, and reporting. CONSIGN is a web-based tool inclusive of seven steps that guide the user through control comparator design. The tool was refined through multiple rounds of pilot testing that included more than 130 people working in neurorehabilitation research. Four hypothetical exemplar trials, which span preclinical, mood, aphasia, and motor recovery, demonstrate how the tool can be applied in practice. Six consensus recommendations are defined that span research domains, professional disciplines, and international borders.
对照比较组的选择是一个关键的试验设计问题。正在进行中风恢复和康复干预试验的临床前和临床研究人员,在确定实验性干预相对于对照比较组的益处时,必须仔细考虑所选对照比较组的适当性和相关性。为选定的对照比较组确立强有力的理论依据,可提高试验的完整性及其结果的有效性。本次中风恢复与康复圆桌会议(SRRR)特别工作组采用了一种图论投票系统,对对照比较组设计过程中应对挑战的重要性和难易程度进行排序。“确定合适的对照类型”被列为易于应对且非常重要,“常规护理的变异性”被列为难以应对且重要性较低,而“理解对照的内容及其与实验性干预的差异”被列为非常重要但不易应对。开发了对照设计(CONSIGN)决策支持工具,以应对已确定的挑战并加强对照比较组的选择、描述和报告。CONSIGN是一个基于网络的工具,包含七个步骤,指导用户完成对照比较组设计。该工具经过多轮试点测试进行了完善,参与测试的有130多名从事神经康复研究的人员。四项假设性范例试验,涵盖临床前、情绪、失语症和运动恢复等方面,展示了该工具在实际中的应用方法。确定了六项共识建议,其范围涵盖研究领域、专业学科和国际边界。