Search

Background: The new European Medicines Agency (EMA) Clinical Trials Information System (CTIS), based on the Clinical Trials Regulation (CTR EU 536/2014), came into full effect on 31 January 2022 and was intended to provide an easier, more streamlined approach to the registration of clinical trials taking place in Europe. Using the experience gained on the new regulatory framework from three multi-national European clinical research studies of outbreak-prone infectious diseases, this article describes the advantages and shortcomings of the new clinical trial submission procedure. Methods: We report the time to approval, size of the application dossier, and number of requests for information (RFIs) for each study. We also explore the experience of each study within the regulatory framework and its use of CTIS to document the real-world, practical consequences of the system on individual studies. The study assesses the experience of three multi-country studies conducted in Europe working within the EU and non-EU regulatory environments. Results: While the time to regulatory and ethical approval has improved since the implementation of the new regulation, the timelines for approvals are still unacceptably slow, particularly for studies being conducted in the context of an evolving outbreak. Within the new regulatory approval procedure, there is evidence of conflicting application requirements, increased document burden, barriers to submitting important modifications, and debilitating technical hurdles. Conclusions: CTIS promised to lower the administrative bar, but unfortunately this has not been achieved. There are challenges that need to be urgently confronted and addressed for international research collaborators to effectively manage health crises in the future. While the value of multi-national outbreak research is clear, the limitations and delays imposed by the system, which raise challenging ethical questions about the regulation, are prejudicial to all clinical research, especially publicly funded academic studies. This report is relevant to both regulators and clinical researchers. It is hoped that these findings can help improve pan-European clinical trials, especially for the purpose of epidemic preparedness and response. Trial registration: This paper references experiences gained during management of three pan-European trials: EU-SolidAct's Bari-SolidAct (CT No. 2022-500385-99-00 - 15 March 2022) and AXL-SolidAct (CT No. 2022-500363-12-00 - 19 April 2022), and MOSAIC (CT No. 2022-501132-42-00 - 22 June 2022). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The majority of surgical interventions are performed in day care and patients are discharged after the first critical postoperative period. At home, patients have limited options to contact healthcare providers in the hospital in case of severe pain and nausea. A smartphone application for patients to self-record pain and nausea when at home after day care surgery might improve patient's recovery. Currently patient experiences with smartphone applications are promising; however, we do not know whether remote monitoring with such an application also improves the patient's recovery. This study aims to evaluate the experienced quality of recovery after day care surgery between patients provided with the smartphone application for remote monitoring and patients receiving standard care without remote monitoring. Methods: This non-blinded randomized controlled trial with mixed methods design will include 310 adult patients scheduled for day care surgery. The intervention group receives the smartphone application with text message function for remote monitoring that enables patients to record pain and nausea. An anaesthesia professional trained in empathetic communication, who will contact the patient in case of severe pain or nausea, performs daily monitoring. The control group receives standard care, with post-discharge verbal and paper instructions. The main study endpoint is the difference in perceived quality of recovery, measured with the QoR-15 questionnaire on the 7th day after day care surgery. Secondary endpoints are the overall score on the Quality of Recovery-15 at day 1, 4 and 7-post discharge, the perceived quality of hospital aftercare and experienced psychological effects of remote monitoring during postoperative recovery from day care surgery. Discussion: This study will investigate if facilitating patients and healthcare professionals with a tool for accessible and empathetic communication might lead to an improved quality of the postoperative recovery period. Trial registration: The 'Quality of recovery after day care surgery with app-controlled remote monitoring: a randomized controlled trial' is approved and registered on 23 February 2022 by Research Ethics Committees United with registration number R21.076/NL78144.100.21. The protocol NL78144.100.21, 'Quality of recovery after day care surgery with app-controlled remote monitoring: a randomized controlled trial', is registered at the ClinicalTrials.gov public website (registration date 16 February 2022; NCT05244772) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The aim of this paper is to describe the utility of various recruitment modalities utilized in the Working to Increase Stability through Exercise (WISE) study. WISE is a pragmatic randomized trial that is testing the impact of a 3-year, multicomponent (strength, balance, aerobic) physical activity program led by trained volunteers or delivered via DVD on the rate of serious fall-related injuries among adults 65 and older with a past history of fragility fractures (e.g., vertebral, fall-related). The modified goal was to recruit 1130 participants over 2 years in three regions of Pennsylvania.Methods: The at-risk population was identified primarily using letters mailed to patients of three health systems and those over 65 in each region, as well as using provider alerts in the health record, proactive recruitment phone calls, radio advertisements, and presentations at community meetings.Results: Over 24 months of recruitment, 209,301 recruitment letters were mailed, resulting in 6818 telephone interviews. The two most productive recruitment methods were letters (72% of randomized participants) and the research registries at the University of Pittsburgh (11%). An average of 211 letters were required to be mailed for each participant enrolled. Of those interviewed, 2854 were ineligible, 2,825 declined to enroll and 1139 were enrolled and randomized. Most participants were female (84.4%), under age 75 (64.2%), and 50% took an osteoporosis medication. Not having a prior fragility fracture was the most common reason for not being eligible (87.5%). The most common reason provided for declining enrollment was not feeling healthy enough to participate (12.6%).Conclusions: The WISE study achieved its overall recruitment goal. Bulk mailing was the most productive method for recruiting community-dwelling older adults at risk of serious fall-related injury into this long-term physical activity intervention trial, and electronic registries are important sources and should be considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: n-of-1 trials are a type of crossover trial designed to optimise the evaluation of health technologies in individual patients. This trial design may be considered for the evaluation of health technologies in rare conditions where fewer patients are available to take part in research. This review describes the characteristics of randomised n-of-1 trials conducted over the span of 12 years, including how the n-of-1 design has been employed to study both rare and non-rare conditions. Methods: Databases and clinical trials registries were searched for articles including "n-of-1" in the title between 2011 and 2023. The reference lists of reviews identified by the searches were searched for any additional eligible articles. Randomised n-of-1 trials were selected for inclusion and data were extracted on a range of design, population, and analysis characteristics. Descriptive statistics were produced for all variables. Results: We identified 74 studies meeting our eligibility criteria, 13 of which (17.6%) were conducted in rare conditions. They were conducted in a range of clinical areas with the most common being neurological conditions (n = 16, 21.6%). The median (Q1, Q3) number of participants randomised was 9 (4, 20) and 12 trials (16.2%) involved a single patient only. Forty-six (62.2%) trials evaluated pharmaceutical interventions and 49 (66.2%) trials were placebo controlled. Trials had a median (Q1, Q3) of six (4, 8) periods and 61 (82.4%) compared two health technologies. Fifty-seven (77.0%) trials incorporated blinding and 32 (43.2%) had a washout period. Forty-nine trials (66.2%) used patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to assess the primary outcome. Trials used a range of approaches to analysis and 48 (64.9%) combined data from multiple patients. The characteristics of the n-of-1 trials conducted in rare conditions were generally consistent with those in non-rare conditions. Conclusions: n-of-1 trials are still underused and the application of the n-of-1 design for the evaluation of health technologies for rare diseases has been particularly limited. We have summarised the characteristics of randomised n-of-1 trials in rare and non-rare conditions. We hope that it can inform researchers in the design of future n-of-1 studies. Further work is required to provide guidance on specific design considerations, implementation, and statistical analysis of these studies. Trial registration: Not applicable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is the standard treatment for early gastric neoplasms (EGN). Controlling intraoperative bleeding is crucial for ensuring safe and reliable procedures. ESD using the spray coagulation mode (SCM-ESD) has been developed to control bleeding more effectively than ESD using the conventional forced coagulation mode (FCM-ESD). This study aims to compare the hemostatic efficacies of SCM-ESD and FCM-ESD. Methods: This multicenter, prospective, parallel, randomized, open-label superiority trial will be conducted in five Japanese institutions. Patients with a preoperative diagnosis of intramucosal EGC will be randomized to undergo either SCM-ESD or FCM-ESD. The primary outcome measure is the completion of ESD with an electrosurgical knife alone, without the use of hemostatic forceps. Secondary outcomes include the number and duration of hemostasis using hemostatic forceps, procedure time, curability, and safety. A total of 130 patients will be enrolled in this study. Discussion: This trial will provide evidence on the hemostatic efficacy of SCM-ESD compared with FCM-ESD in patients with intramucosal EGN, potentially improving the safety and reliability of ESD procedures. Trial registration: The trial has been registered at the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registration (UMIN-CTR) as UMIN000040518. The reception number is R000054009. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Considered one of the highest levels of evidence, results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) remain an essential building block in mental health research. They are frequently used to confirm that an intervention "works" and to guide treatment decisions. Given their importance in the field, it is concerning that the quality of many RCT evaluations in mental health research remains poor. Common errors range from inadequate missing data handling and inappropriate analyses (e.g., baseline randomization tests or analyses of within-group changes) to unduly interpretations of trial results and insufficient reporting. These deficiencies pose a threat to the robustness of mental health research and its impact on patient care. Many of these issues may be avoided in the future if mental health researchers are provided with a better understanding of what constitutes a high-quality RCT evaluation. Methods: In this primer article, we give an introduction to core concepts and caveats of clinical trial evaluations in mental health research. We also show how to implement current best practices using open-source statistical software. Results: Drawing on Rubin's potential outcome framework, we describe that RCTs put us in a privileged position to study causality by ensuring that the potential outcomes of the randomized groups become exchangeable. We discuss how missing data can threaten the validity of our results if dropouts systematically differ from non-dropouts, introduce trial estimands as a way to co-align analyses with the goals of the evaluation, and explain how to set up an appropriate analysis model to test the treatment effect at one or several assessment points. A novice-friendly tutorial is provided alongside this primer. It lays out concepts in greater detail and showcases how to implement techniques using the statistical software R, based on a real-world RCT dataset. Discussion: Many problems of RCTs already arise at the design stage, and we examine some avoidable and unavoidable "weak spots" of this design in mental health research. For instance, we discuss how lack of prospective registration can give way to issues like outcome switching and selective reporting, how allegiance biases can inflate effect estimates, review recommendations and challenges in blinding patients in mental health RCTs, and describe problems arising from underpowered trials. Lastly, we discuss why not all randomized trials necessarily have a limited external validity and examine how RCTs relate to ongoing efforts to personalize mental health care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: As a practice-oriented discipline, strict adherence to reporting guidelines is particularly important in randomized controlled trial (RCT) abstracts of the nursing area. However, whether abstract reports after 2010 have complied with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials for Abstracts (CONSORT-A) guideline is unclear. This study aimed to evaluate whether the publication of CONSORT-A has improved abstract reporting in nursing and explores the factors associated with better adherence to the guidelines. Methods: We searched the Web of Science for 200 RCTs randomly selected from ten nursing journals. We used a data extraction form based on CONSORT-A, including 16 items, to analyze the reporting adherence to the guidelines, and the reporting rate of each item and the total score for each abstract were used to indicate adherence and overall quality score (OQS, range 0–16). A comparison of the total mean score between the two periods was made, and affecting factors were analyzed. Results: In the studies we included, 48 abstracts were published pre-CONSORT-A whereas 152 post-CONSORT-A. The overall mean score for reporting adherence to 16 items was 7.41 ± 2.78 and 9.16 ± 2.76 for pre- and post-CONSORT-A, respectively (total score: 16). The most poorly reported items are "harms (0%)," "outcomes in method (8.5%)," "randomization (25%)," and "blinding (6.5%)." Items including the year of publication, impact factor, multiple center trial, word count, and structured abstract are significantly associated with higher adherence. Conclusions: The adherence to abstract reporting in nursing literature has improved since the CONSORT-A era, but the overall completeness of RCT abstracts remained low. A joint effort by authors, editors, and journals is necessary to improve reporting quality of RCT abstracts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reporting of intervention research has been inadequate for many years. The development and promotion of freely available checklists aims to address this problem by providing researchers with a list of items that require reporting to enable study interpretation and replication. In this commentary, we present evidence from a recent systematic review of 51 randomised controlled trials published 2015–2020 that inadequate intervention reporting remains a widespread issue and that checklists are not being used to describe all intervention components. In 2022, we assessed the submission guidelines of 33 journals that published articles included in our review and found that just one at the time encouraged the use of reporting checklists for all intervention components. To drive progress, we contacted the editors of the other 32 journals and requested that they update their submission guidelines in response. We conclude by highlighting the waste associated with current practices and encourage journals from all fields to urgently review their submission guidelines. Only through collective action can we build an evidence base that is fit for purpose. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Tai Chi (TC), as one of mild to moderate exercise therapies specifically recommended by clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physician, is a viable option for chronic non-specific low back pain (CNLBP) treatment. Nevertheless, limited studies focused on the effect of different weekly frequencies of TC in elders with CNLBP. This superiority study aims to compare the differences of TC with different weekly frequencies in elders with CNLBP on the premise of proving its effectiveness, and identifying whether mindfulness mediates the effect of TC on treatment outcomes.Methods: In total, 284 senior citizens with CNLBP will be recruited in this single-centre, randomised, single-blinded (outcome assessors, data managers and the statistician), parallel controlled trial. Participants will be randomly divided into either one of three TC groups (1, 3, or 5 sessions/week, on the basis of weekly health educational lectures) or weekly health educational lectures, sustaining for 12 weeks, followed by 12 weeks of follow-up after the end of intervention. The primary outcome (the changes of LBP intensity at rest) will be measured at baseline before randomisation and immediately after the completion of weeks 4, 8 and 12 of the intervention, and the end of follow-up (week 24) using the visual analogue scale (VAS, 0-10 cm) to put a mark on the VAS scale to show how severities of their average low back pain have been over the past 24 h. Secondary outcomes, including Beck Depression Inventory-II, Pain Catastrophising Scale and Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire, Oswestry Disability Index and Short Form-36, will be measured at baseline and immediately after the completion of week 12 of the intervention and end of follow-up. The intention-to-treat and per-protocol principles will be used to analyse outcomes with a setting at α = 0.05 as statistical significance.Discussion: This comprehensive and detailed protocol will be the first trial to compare the effectiveness of different weekly frequencies of TC in elders with CNLBP. The outcomes may provide valuable data about the choice of the ideal number of sessions to further normalise the application of exercise for clinicians.Trial Registration: Chinese clinical trial registry ChiCTR2200058190 . Registered on 1 April 2022. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Rotavirus is a primary infectious virus causing childhood diarrhoea and is associated with significant mortality in children. Three African countries (Nigeria, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Angola) are among the five countries that account for 50% of all diarrheal-related deaths worldwide. This indicates that much needs to be done to reduce this burden. The World Health Organization International Clinical Trial Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) is a global repository for primary registries reporting on clinical trials. This study aimed to identify and describe planned, ongoing, and completed rotavirus vaccine trials conducted globally.Methods: We searched WHO-ICTRP on 17 June 2021 and conducted a cross-sectional analysis of rotavirus studies listed in the database. Data extraction included trial location, participant age, source of the trial record, trial phase, sponsor, and availability of results. We used the Microsoft Excel 365 package to generate descriptive summary statistics.Results: We identified 242 rotavirus vaccine trials registered from 2004 to 2020. Most of these trials were registered retrospectively, with only 26% of the rotavirus vaccine trials reporting the availability of results in their registries. Most of the trials are studying children aged less than 5 years. The recruitment status for these trials is currently shown in the WHO-ICTRP as "not recruiting" for 80.17% of trials, "recruiting" for 11.57% of trials recruiting, and unknown for 6.61% of trials. The continents in which these rotavirus vaccine trials have recruitment sites in Asia (41%) and North America (20%), with the maximum number of trials in the clinical trial registries coming from India (21%) and the USA (11%) with most being sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry. Our analysis shows that only 26% of the rotavirus vaccine trials report the availability of results in their registries.Conclusions: Mapping rotavirus vaccine clinical trial activity using data from the WHO ICTRP beneficial provides valuable information on planned, ongoing, or completed trials for researchers, funders, and healthcare decision-makers. Despite the high rotavirus disease burden in low- and middle-income countries, including Africa, there is minimal clinical trial activity related to the condition on the continent. The clinical trial registries as a valuable tool to share interim results of the trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Retention remains a major challenge for many clinical trials. The SPIRIT guidelines state the following information on retention should be included in the trial protocol "Plans to promote participant retention and complete follow-up, including list of any outcome data to be collected for participants who discontinue or deviate from intervention protocols". This guidance shows the importance of planning retention methods and handling missing data as this can impact how the results of the trial are interpreted. The most recent Cochrane review of strategies to improve retention in clinical trials highlighted that some trials implemented multiple retention strategies and we questioned whether the use of multiple strategies was planned at the design stage and included in the protocol or are strategies implemented when retention becomes an issue within the trial. The purpose of our scoping review is to establish if and how trial teams prepare for retention at the design phase of clinical trials.Methods and Analysis: We will follow the methodological framework and guidelines for scoping reviews outlined by the Joanna Briggs Institute. We will search MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, CINAHL (EBSCO), and Web of Science. A comprehensive search strategy for PubMed was developed in collaboration with an experienced research librarian. We will include protocols for phase 2, 3, and 4 RCTs as well as pilot and feasibility studies. The screening process will involve two reviewers. EM will independently screen all titles and abstracts. FS will screen 10% of the overall search output, and where necessary full protocol texts will be screened to determine eligibility. We will randomly sample eligible protocols to ensure the protocols represent a variety of trial and intervention types. Data will be extracted from each protocol and the results will be synthesised. The analysis will be qualitative using a narrative summary and descriptive statistics where appropriate.Discussion: The scoping review will help trial methodologists better understand if retention strategies are planned for during the design stage of the trial contributing to the PRioRiTy II unanswered question "How should people who run trials plan for retention during their funding application and creation of the trial (protocol development)?". [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The core intrinsic connectivity networks (core-ICNs), encompassing the default-mode network (DMN), salience network (SN) and central executive network (CEN), have been shown to be dysfunctional in individuals with internalizing disorders (IDs, e.g. major depressive disorder, MDD; generalized anxiety disorder, GAD; social anxiety disorder, SOC). As such, source-localized, closed-loop brain training of electrophysiological signals, also known as standardized low-resolution electromagnetic tomography (sLORETA) neurofeedback (NFB), targeting key cortical nodes within these networks has the potential to reduce symptoms associated with IDs and restore normal core ICN function. We intend to conduct a randomized, double-blind (participant and assessor), sham-controlled, parallel-group (3-arm) trial of sLORETA infraslow (<0.1 Hz) fluctuation neurofeedback (sLORETA ISF-NFB) 3 times per week over 4 weeks in participants (n=60) with IDs. Our primary objectives will be to examine patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and neurophysiological measures to (1) compare the potential effects of sham ISF-NFB to either genuine 1-region ISF-NFB or genuine 2-region ISF-NFB, and (2) assess for potential associations between changes in PRO scores and modifications of electroencephalographic (EEG) activity/connectivity within/between the trained regions of interest (ROIs). As part of an exploratory analysis, we will investigate the effects of additional training sessions and the potential for the potentiation of the effects over time.Methods: We will randomly assign participants who meet the criteria for MDD, GAD, and/or SOC per the MINI (Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview for DSM-5) to one of three groups: (1) 12 sessions of posterior cingulate cortex (PCC) ISF-NFB up-training (n=15), (2) 12 sessions of concurrent PCC ISF up-training and dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC) ISF-NFB down-training (n=15), or (3) 6 sessions of yoked-sham training followed by 6 sessions genuine ISF-NFB (n=30). Transdiagnostic PROs (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, HADS; Inventory of Depression and Anxiety Symptoms - Second Version, IDAS-II; Multidimensional Emotional Disorder Inventory, MEDI; Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale - Short Form, IUS-12; Repetitive Thinking Questionnaire, RTQ-10) as well as resting-state neurophysiological measures (full-band EEG and ECG) will be collected from all subjects during two baseline sessions (approximately 1 week apart) then at post 6 sessions, post 12 sessions, and follow-up (1 month later). We will employ Bayesian methods in R and advanced source-localisation software (i.e. exact low-resolution brain electromagnetic tomography; eLORETA) in our analysis.Discussion: This protocol will outline the rationale and research methodology for a clinical pilot trial of sLORETA ISF-NFB targeting key nodes within the core-ICNs in a female ID population with the primary aims being to assess its potential efficacy via transdiagnostic PROs and relevant neurophysiological measures.Trial Registration: Our study was prospectively registered with the Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR; Trial ID: ACTRN12619001428156). Registered on October 15, 2019. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Applications of mobile technologies (mHealth) have the potential to reduce health inequalities, give patients more control over their health, and improve health care's cost-effectiveness. The widespread use of mobile phones offers us a new way to prevent cervical cancer. The objective of the study was to design and develop a mobile phone application (app) that aims to conduct a behavioral intervention for women and to evaluate the efficacy of the app-based intervention.Methods: This study involves 5 phases. In the first phase, understanding women's perspectives will be identified using a qualitative approach based on the I-Change model. In phase 2, the results from the qualitative approach and requirement prioritization through providing experts' perspectives will be done. The main outputs of this phase will be resulted in prioritizing the main measurable effective variables of the I-Change model. Phase 3 will be processed for the development and psychometric of an assessment tool regarding selected constructs. In phase 4, the App framework and content development will be performed. In phase 5, a three-armed, parallel-design randomized controlled trial will be conducted on women. Two hundred ten women will be randomly assigned to three groups including two intervention groups and one control group. The intervention groups included the following: (1) a mobile application and (2) a digital book. The data will be evaluated using tools designed and constructed in phase 3 of the study at baseline in 3-month follow-up assessments. The impact of the two interventions on cervical cancer prevention behaviors through mobile-based educational intervention will then be evaluated.Discussion: A theory-based health education program using a mobile app to improve cervical cancer-preventive behaviors will be implemented for the first time in Iran. With an effective health mobile-based educational design, it is very important to determine whether Iranian women will be motivated to adhere to preventive behavior related to CC.Trial Registration: Iranian Clinical Trial Register IRCT20181205041861N3. Registered V2.0 on 26 October 2021. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Trials involving adults who lack capacity to provide consent rely on proxy or surrogate decision-makers, usually a family member, to make decisions about participation. Interventions to enhance proxy decisions about trial participation are now being developed. However, a lack of standardised outcome measures limits evaluation of these interventions. The aim of this study was to establish an agreed standardised core outcome set (COS) for use when evaluating interventions to improve proxy decisions about trial participation.Methods: We used established methods to develop the COS including a consensus study with key stakeholder groups comprising those who will use the COS in research (researchers and healthcare professionals) and patients or their representatives. Following a scoping review to identify candidate items, we used a modified two-round Delphi survey to achieve consensus on core outcomes, with equivocal items taken to a consensus meeting for discussion. The COS was finalised following an online consensus meeting in October 2020.Results: A total of 28 UK stakeholders (5 researchers, 10 trialists, 3 patient/family representatives, 7 recruiters and 3 advisors/approvers) participated in the online Delphi survey to rank candidate items from the scoping review (n = 36) and additional items proposed by participants (n = 1). Items were broadly grouped into three categories: how family members make decisions, their experiences of making decisions, and the personal aspects that influence the decision. Following the Delphi survey, 27 items were included and ten items exhibited no consensus which required discussion at the consensus meeting. Sixteen participants attended the meeting, including additional patient/family representatives invited to increase representation from this key group (n = 2). We reached consensus for the inclusion of 28 outcome items, including one selected at the consensus meeting.Conclusions: The study identified outcomes that should be measured as a minimum in all evaluations of interventions to enhance proxy decisions about trials. These relate to the process of decision-making, proxies' experience of decision-making, and factors that influence decision-making such as understanding. Further work with people with impairing conditions and their families is needed to explore their views about the COS and to identify appropriate outcome measures and timing of measurement.Trial Registration: The study is registered on the COMET database ( https://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/1409 ). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]