Suppr超能文献

公众参与澳大利亚临床试验:系统评价。

Public involvement in Australian clinical trials: A systematic review.

机构信息

Social Work and Social Policy, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.

Department of Dietetics, Human Nutrition and Sport, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.

出版信息

Clin Trials. 2024 Aug;21(4):507-515. doi: 10.1177/17407745231224533. Epub 2024 Feb 26.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Public involvement enhances the relevance, quality, and impact of research. There is some evidence that public involvement in Australian research lags other countries, such as the United Kingdom. The purpose of the systematic review was to establish the rates and describe the characteristics of public involvement in Australian clinical trials.

METHODS

We reviewed evidence of public involvement in all Australian randomised controlled trials published in the first 6 months of 2021. To determine the quality of public involvement, we used the five-item short-form version of the Guidance of Reporting Involvement Patients and the Public, version 2.

RESULTS

In total, 325 randomised controlled trials were included, of which 17 (5%) reported any public involvement. Six trials reported public involvement in setting the research aim and seven in developing study methods. The authors of one study reflected on the overall role and influence of public involvement in the research.

CONCLUSION

Rate of public involvement in Australian clinical trials is seemingly substantially lower than those reported in countries with similar advanced public health care systems, notably the United Kingdom. Our observations may be explained by a lack of researcher skills in how to involve the public and the failure by major funding agencies in Australia to mandate public involvement when deciding on how to award grant funding.

摘要

背景

公众参与可以提高研究的相关性、质量和影响力。有证据表明,澳大利亚的公众参与研究落后于其他国家,例如英国。本系统评价的目的是确定澳大利亚临床试验中公众参与的比例并描述其特征。

方法

我们对 2021 年前 6 个月发表的所有澳大利亚随机对照试验中的公众参与证据进行了综述。为了确定公众参与的质量,我们使用了患者和公众参与报告指南,第 2 版的 5 项简短形式版本。

结果

共纳入 325 项随机对照试验,其中 17 项(5%)报告了任何形式的公众参与。6 项试验报告了公众参与设定研究目标,7 项参与了研究方法的制定。有一项研究的作者反思了公众参与在研究中的整体作用和影响。

结论

澳大利亚临床试验中公众参与的比例明显低于具有类似先进公共卫生保健系统的国家,尤其是英国。我们的观察结果可能是由于研究人员缺乏如何让公众参与的技能,以及澳大利亚主要资助机构在决定如何授予资助时未能强制要求公众参与。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2d41/11304641/352346cf9e4e/10.1177_17407745231224533-fig1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验