Search

Background: High consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB) is a global health concern. Additionally, sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption is disproportionately high among adolescents and adults in rural Appalachia. The primary study objective is to determine the intervention effects of Kids SIPsmartER on students' SSB consumption. Secondary objectives focus on caregivers' SSB consumption and secondary student and caregiver outcomes [e.g, body mass index (BMI), quality of life (QOL)]. Methods: This Type 1 hybrid, cluster randomized controlled trial includes 12 Appalachian middle schools (6 randomized to Kids SIPsmartER and 6 to control). Kids SIPsmartER is a 6-month, 12 lesson, multi-level, school-based, behavior and health literacy program aimed at reducing SSB among 7th grade middle school students. The program also incorporates a two-way text message strategy for caregivers. In this primary prevention intervention, all 7th grade students and their caregivers from participating schools were eligible to participate, regardless of baseline SSB consumption. Validated instruments were used to assess SSB behaviors and QOL. Height and weight were objectively measured in students and self-reported by caregivers. Analyses included modified two-part models with time fixed effects that controlled for relevant demographics and included school cluster robust standard errors. Results: Of the 526 students and 220 caregivers, mean (SD) ages were 12.7 (0.5) and 40.6 (6.7) years, respectively. Students were 55% female. Caregivers were mostly female (95%) and White (93%); 25% had a high school education or less and 33% had an annual household income less than $50,000. Regardless of SSB intake at baseline and relative to control participants, SSB significantly decreased among students [-7.2 ounces/day (95% CI = -10.7, -3.7); p < 0.001, effect size (ES) = 0.35] and caregivers [-6.3 ounces/day (95% CI = -11.3, -1.3); p = 0.014, ES = 0.33]. Among students (42%) and caregivers (28%) who consumed > 24 SSB ounces/day at baseline (i.e., high consumers), the ES increased to 0.45 and 0.95, respectively. There were no significant effects for student or caregiver QOL indicators or objectively measured student BMI; however, caregiver self-reported BMI significantly decreased in the intervention versus control schools (p = 0.001). Conclusions: Kids SIPsmartER was effective at reducing SSB consumption among students and their caregivers in the rural, medically underserved Appalachian region. Importantly, SSB effects were even stronger among students and caregivers who were high consumers at baseline. Trial registration: Clincialtrials.gov: NCT03740113. Registered 14 November 2018– Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03740113. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Involving patient and community stakeholders in clinical trials adds value by ensuring research prioritizes patient goals both in conduct of the study and application of the research. The use of stakeholder committees and their impact on the conduct of a multicenter clinical trial have been underreported clinically and academically. The aim of this study is to describe how Study Advisory Committee (SAC) recommendations were implemented throughout the Emergency Medicine Palliative Care Access (EMPallA) trial. EMPallA is a multi-center, pragmatic two-arm randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing the effectiveness of nurse-led telephonic case management and specialty, outpatient palliative care of older adults with advanced illness. Methods: A SAC consisting of 18 individuals, including patients with palliative care experience, members of healthcare organizations, and payers was convened for the EMPallA trial. The SAC engaged in community-based participatory research and assisted in all aspects from study design to dissemination. The SAC met with the research team quarterly and annually from project inception to dissemination. Using meeting notes and recordings we completed a qualitative thematic analysis using an iterative process to develop themes and subthemes to summarize SAC recommendations throughout the project's duration. Results: The SAC convened 16 times between 2017 and 2020. Over the course of the project, the SAC provided 41 unique recommendations. Twenty-six of the 41 (63%) recommendations were adapted into formal Institutional Review Board (IRB) study modifications. Recommendations were coded into four major themes: Scientific, Pragmatic, Resource and Dissemination. A majority of the recommendations were related to either the Scientific (46%) or Pragmatic (29%) themes. Recommendations were not mutually exclusive across three study phases: Preparatory, execution and translational. A vast majority (94%) of the recommendations made were related to the execution phase. Major IRB study modifications were made based on their recommendations including data collection of novel dependent variables and expanding recruitment to Spanish-speaking patients. Conclusions: Our study provides an example of successful integration of a SAC in the conduct of a pragmatic, multi-center RCT. Future trials should engage with SACs in all study phases to ensure trials are relevant, inclusive, patient-focused, and attentive to gaps between health care and patient and family needs. Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03325985, 10/30/2017. Plain English summary: Clinical research should involve patient and community stakeholder perspectives to make sure the study addresses questions important to the studied population. One way to do this is by creating a group of stakeholders who can advise on the conduct of a study. We assembled a Study Advisory Committee (SAC) for the Emergency Medicine Palliative Care Access (EMPallA) trial. The purpose of this clinical trial is to compare the effectiveness of nurse-led telephonic case management and specialty, outpatient palliative care of older adults with advanced illness. This paper describes how the SACs involvement translated into direct impacts on the EMPallA trial. The trial research team held regular meetings with the SAC throughout the trial process. Their involvement led to many significant changes in the trial, such as expanding recruitment inclusion criteria (Spanish-speaking patients), and including survey instruments to measure lonelines and caregiver burden. The SAC also devised strategies to overcome patient and caregiver recruitment and retention challenges, including the creation of patient-friendly materials and training for research coordinators. This study provides a successful example of how actively engaging patient and community stakeholders, through committee engagement, can promote patient priorities in all phases of a trial while facilitating patient recruitment and retention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Spinal manual therapy and corticosteroid nerve root injection are commonly used to treat patients with lumbar radiculopathy. The SALuBRITY trial—a two parallel group, double sham controlled, randomised clinical trial—is being developed to compare their effectiveness. By gathering patients' and clinicians' perspectives and involving them in discussions related to the trial research question and objectives, proposed trial recruitment processes, methods, and outcome measures, we aimed to improve the relevance and quality of the SALuBRITY trial. Methods: We involved patients with lived experience of lumbar radiculopathy (n = 5) and primary care clinicians (n = 4) with experience in the treatment of these patients. Involvement activities included an initial kick-off event to introduce the project, establishing a shared purpose statement, and empowering patient and clinician advisors for their involvement, followed by semi-structured group and individual interviews, and questionnaires to evaluate the experience throughout the project. Results: Both patient and clinician advisors endorsed the significance and relevance of the trial's objectives. Patients assessed the proposed trial methods as acceptable within the context of a trusting patient-clinician relationship. A trial recruitment and enrolment target time of up to five days was regarded as acceptable, although patients with chronic radiculopathy may need more time to consider their trial participation decision. All advisors reached consensus on the acceptability of a medication washout phase of 12- to 24-h before pain outcome measurement, with the inclusion of a rescue medication protocol. Both advisory groups preferred leg pain over back pain as the primary clinical outcome, with patient advisors advocating for personalized primary pain localization. Furthermore, patients requested expanding the pain, enjoyment, and general activity scale with peak pain intensity, rather than average pain alone. Patient and clinician advisors evaluated their engagement in clinical research as meaningful and impactful. Conclusion: Patient and public involvement resulted in important and relevant considerations for the SALuBRITY trial, spanning all research phases. These findings hold promise for enhancing the trial's quality and relevance and improving its translation into clinical practice. Plain English summary: In the SALuBRITY trial, we are comparing the effectiveness of two common treatments, spinal manual therapy and corticosteroid nerve root injection, for patients with lumbar radiculopathy, which is back pain that spreads into the leg because of an irritated nerve in the lower back. To ensure the trial's relevance and quality, we actively engaged both patients with lived experience of lumbar radiculopathy and primary care clinicians. Their valuable input supported the trial's objectives and found the proposed methods acceptable, especially in the context of a trusting patient-clinician relationship. Key consensus points included a reasonable recruitment and enrollment processing target time of up to five days, though chronic radiculopathy patients may need more time. A 12- to 24-h medication washout phase before pain assessment was endorsed, with emphasis on a rescue medication option. Leg pain was preferred over back pain as the primary outcome, and patients advocated for personalizing primary pain location. Our advisors evaluated their engagement in this patient and public involvement project as meaningful and impactful. Involving patients and clinicians in the SALuBRITY trial development process promises to enhance the trial's quality, relevance, and translation into clinical practice, ensuring it addresses the real needs and experiences of patients with lumbar radiculopathy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and objectives: Older adults keep transforming with Baby Boomers and Gen Xers being the leading older population. Their lifestyle, however, is not well understood. The middle-aged and older Chinese adults' health using actigraphy in Taiwan (MOCHA-T) collected both objective and subjective data to depict the health and lifestyle of this population. The objectives, design, and measures of the MOCHA-T study are introduced, and the caveats and future directions related to the use of the data are presented. Methods: People aged 50 and over were recruited from the community, with a subset of women aged 45–49 invited to supplement data on menopause and aging. Four instruments (i.e., self-reported questionnaires, diary, wrist actigraphy recorder, and GPS) were used to collect measures of sociodemographic, health, psychosocial, behavioral, temporal, and spatial data. Results: A total of 242 participants who returned the informed consent and questionnaires were recruited in the MOCHA-T study. Among them, 94.6%, 95.0%, and 25.2% also completed the diary, actigraphy, and GPS data, respectively. There was almost no difference in sociodemographic characteristics between those with and without a completed diary, actigraphy, and GPS data, except for age group and educational level for those who returned completed actigraphy data. Conclusion: The MOCHA-T study is a multidimensional dataset that allows researchers to describe the health, behaviors, and lifestyle patterns, and their interactions with the environment of the newer generation of middle-aged and older adults in Taiwan. It can be compared with other countries with actigraphy and GPS-based lifestyle data of middle-aged and older adults in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Qualitative longitudinal research (QLR) is an emerging methodology used in health research. The method literature states that the change in a phenomenon through time should be the focus of any QLR study, but in empirical studies, the analysis of changes through time is often poorly described, and the emphasis on time/change in the findings varies greatly. This inconsistency might depend on limitations in the existing method literature in terms of describing how QLR studies can present findings. The aim of this study was to develop and describe a typology of alternative approaches for integrating time and/or change in QLR findings. Methods: In this method study, we used an adapted scoping review design. Articles were identified using EBSCOhost. In total, methods and results sections from 299 QLR articles in the field of health research were analyzed with inspiration from content analysis. Results: We constructed a typology of three types and seven subtypes. The types were based on the underlying structural principles of how time/change was presented: Type A) Findings have a low utilization of longitudinal data, Type B) Findings are structured according to chronological time, and Type C) Findings focus on changes through time. These types differed in 1) the way the main focus was on time, change or neither; 2) the level of interpretation in the findings; and 3) how theoretical understandings of time/change were articulated in the articles. Each type encompassed two or three subtypes that represented distinct approaches to the aim and results presentation of QLR findings. Conclusions: This method study is the first to describe a coherent and comprehensive typology of alternative approaches for integrating time/change into QLR findings in health research. By providing examples of various subtypes that can be used for results presentations, it can help researchers make informed decisions suitable to their research intent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a prevalent social determinant of health. The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends routine IPV screening of women, but uptake remains variable. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) initiated implementation facilitation (IF) to support integration of IPV screening programs into primary care clinics. An evaluation of IF efforts showed variability in IPV screening rates across sites. The follow-up study presented here used a Matrixed Multiple Case Study (MMCS) approach to examine the multilevel factors impacting IPV screening program implementation across sites with varying levels of implementation success. Methods: This mixed methods study is part of a larger cluster randomized stepped wedge Hybrid-II program evaluation. In the larger trial, participating sites received 6 months of IF consisting of an external facilitator from VHA's Office of Women's Health working closely with an internal facilitator and key site personnel. Recognizing the heterogeneity in implementation outcomes across sites, the MMCS approach was used to enable interpretation of qualitative and quantitative data within and across sites to help contextualize the primary findings from the larger study. Qualitative data collection was guided by the integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) framework and included interviews with key informants involved in IPV screening implementation at eight sites. Quantitative data on IPV screening uptake was derived from medical records and surveys completed by key personnel at the same eight sites to understand implementation facilitation activities. Results: Fifteen factors influencing IPV screening implementation spanning all four i-PARIHS domains were identified and categorized into three distinct categories: (1) factors with enabling influence across all sites, (2) factors deemed important to implementation success, and (3) factors differentiating sites with high/medium versus low implementation success. Conclusions: Understanding the influencing factors across multi-level domains contributing to variable success of IPV screening implementation can inform the tailoring of IF efforts to promote spread and quality of screening. Implementation of IPV screening programs in primary care with IF should consider consistent engagement of internal facilitators with clinic staff involved in implementation, the resourcefulness of external facilitators, and appending resources to IPV screening tools to help key personnel address positive screens. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04106193. Registered on September 26, 2019. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Since 1997, research on Gulf War illness (GWI) has predominantly used 3 case definitions—the original Research definition, the CDC definition, and modifications of the Kansas definition—but they have not been compared against an objective standard. Methods: All 3 case definitions were measured in the U.S. Military Health Survey by a computer-assisted telephone interview in a random sample (n = 6,497) of the 1991 deployed U.S. military force. The interview asked whether participants had heard nerve agent alarms during the conflict. A random subsample (n = 1,698) provided DNA for genotyping the PON1 Q192R polymorphism. Results: The CDC and the Modified Kansas definition without exclusions were satisfied by 41.7% and 39.0% of the deployed force, respectively, and were highly overlapping. The Research definition, a subset of the others, was satisfied by 13.6%. The majority of veterans meeting CDC and Modified Kansas endorsed fewer and milder symptoms; whereas, those meeting Research endorsed more symptoms of greater severity. The group meeting Research was more highly enriched with the PON1 192R risk allele than those meeting CDC and Modified Kansas, and Research had twice the power to detect the previously described gene-environment interaction between hearing alarms and RR homozygosity (adjusted relative excess risk due to interaction [aRERI] = 7.69; 95% CI 2.71–19.13) than CDC (aRERI = 2.92; 95% CI 0.96–6.38) or Modified Kansas without exclusions (aRERI = 3.84; 95% CI 1.30–8.52) or with exclusions (aRERI = 3.42; 95% CI 1.20–7.56). The lower power of CDC and Modified Kansas relative to Research was due to greater false-positive disease misclassification from lower diagnostic specificity. Conclusions: The original Research case definition had greater statistical power to detect a genetic predisposition to GWI. Its greater specificity favors its use in hypothesis-driven research; whereas, the greater sensitivity of the others favor their use in clinical screening for application of future diagnostic biomarkers and clinical care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Several scientific contributions have summarized the "lessons learnt" during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, but only a few authors have discussed what we have learnt on how to design and conduct research during a pandemic. The main intent of this study was to summarize the lessons learnt by an Italian multidisciplinary research group that developed and conducted a longitudinal study on COVID-19 patients infected during the first wave in March 2020 and followed-up for 3 years. Methods: A qualitative research approach embedded into the primary CORonavirus MOnitoRing study (CORMOR) study was developed, according to the the consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research. Multiple data collection strategies were performed: each member was invited to report the main lessons learnt according to his/her perspective and experience from the study design throughout its conduction. The narratives collected were summarized and discussed in face-to-face rounds. The narratives were then thematically analysed according to their main topic in a list that was resent to all members to check the content and their organization. The list of the final "lessons learnt" has been agreed by all members, as described in a detailed fashion. Results: Several lessons were learnt while designing and conducting a longitudinal study during the COVID-19 pandemic and summarised into ten main themes: some are methodological, while others concern how to conduct research in pandemics/epidemics/infectious disease emergencies. Conclusions: The multidisciplinary approach, which also included patients' perspective, helped us to protect the consistency and quality of the research provided in pandemic times. The lesson learnt suggest that our research approach may benefit from changes in education, clinical practice and policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Renal artery stenosis (RAS) is a significant reason for secondary hypertension. Impaired renal function and subsequent cardiopulmonary dysfunction could also occur. Patients of non-atherosclerotic RAS has a relatively young age and long life expectancy. Revascularization with percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) is a viable treatment option. However, restenosis is unavoidable which limits its use. Drug-coated balloon (DCB) has been proven to be effective in restenosis prevention in femoropopliteal arterial diseases and in patients with renal artery stenosis. And PTA for Renal artery fibromuscular dysplasia is safe and clinically successful. Therefore, we could speculate that DCB might have potential efficacy in non-atherosclerotic RAS treatment. Methods and analysis: This will be a randomized multi-center-controlled trial. Eighty-four eligible participants will be assigned randomly in a 1:1 ratio to the control group (plain old balloon, POB) and the experimental group (DCB). Subjects in the former group will receive balloon dilatation alone, and in the latter group will undergo the DCB angioplasty. The DCB used in this study will be a paclitaxel-coated balloon (Orchid, Acotec Scientific Holdings Limited, Beijing, China). Follow-up visits will be scheduled 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after the intervention. Primary outcomes will include controlled blood pressure and primary patency in the 9-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes will include technical success rate, complication rate, and bail-out stenting rate. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT 05858190). Protocol version V.4 (3 May 2023). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) face disability- and travel-related barriers to research participation. We investigate the usefulness and acceptability of asynchronous, online focus groups (AOFGs) for research involving people affected by ALS (patients and family caregivers) and outline lessons learned. Methods: The ALS Talk Project, consisting of seven AOFGs and 100 participants affected by ALS, provided context for this investigation. Hosted on the secure itracks Board™ platform, participants interacted in a threaded web forum structure. Moderators posted weekly discussion questions and facilitated discussion. Data pertaining to methodology, participant interaction and experience, and moderator technique were analyzed using itracks and NVivo 12 analytics (quantitative) and conventional content analysis and the constant-comparative approach (qualitative). Results: There was active engagement within groups, with post lengths averaging 111.48 words and a complex network of branching interactions between participants. One third of participant responses included individual reflections without further interaction. Participants affirmed their co-group members, offered practical advice, and discussed shared and differing perspectives. Moderators responded to all posts, indicating presence and probing answers. AOFGs facilitated qualitative and quantitative data-gathering and flexible response to unanticipated events. Although total participation fell below 50% after 10–12 weeks, participants valued interacting with peers in an inclusive, confidential forum. Participants used a variety of personal devices, browsers, and operating systems when interacting on the online platform. Conclusions: This methodological examination of AOFGs for patient-centred investigations involving people affected by ALS demonstrates their usefulness and acceptability, and advances knowledge of online research methodologies. Lessons learned include: early identification of research goals and participant needs is critical to selecting an AOFG platform; although duration longer than 10–12 weeks may be burdensome in this population, participants were positive about AOFGs; AOFGs offer real world flexibility enabling response to research challenges and opportunities; and, AOGFs can effectively foster safe spaces for sharing personal perspectives and discussing sensitive topics. With moderators playing an important role in fostering engagement, AOFGs facilitated rich data gathering and promoted reciprocity by fostering the exchange of ideas and interaction between peers. Findings may have implications for research involving other neurologically impaired and/or medically vulnerable populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite great promise, trials that ascertain patient clinical data from electronic health records (EHR), referred to here as "EHR-sourced" trials, are limited by uncertainty about how existing trial sites and infrastructure can be best used to operationalize study goals. Evidence is needed to support the practical use of EHRs in contemporary clinical trial settings. Main text: We describe a demonstration project that used EHR data to complement data collected for a contemporary multi-center pharmaceutical industry outcomes trial, and how a central coordinating center supported participating sites through the technical, governance, and operational aspects of this type of activity. We discuss operational considerations related to site selection, data extraction, site performance, and data transfer and quality review, and we outline challenges and lessons learned. We surveyed potential sites and used their responses to assess feasibility, determine the potential capabilities of sites and choose an appropriate data extraction strategy. We designed a flexible, multimodal approach for data extraction, enabling each site to either leverage an existing data source, create a new research datamart, or send all data to the central coordinating center to produce the requisite data elements. We evaluated site performance, as reflected by the speed of contracting and IRB approval, total patients enrolled, enrollment yield, data quality, and compared performance by data collection strategy. Conclusion: While broadening the type of sites able to participate in EHR-sourced trials may lead to greater generalizability and improved enrollment, sites with fewer technical resources may require additional support to participate. Central coordinating center support is essential to facilitate the execution of operational processes. Future work should focus on sharing lessons learned and creating reusable tools to facilitate participation of heterogeneous trial sites. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The covid-19 pandemic has highlighted the role of living systematic reviews. The speed of evidence generated during the covid-19 pandemic accentuated the challenges of managing high volumes of research literature. Methods: In this article, we summarise the characteristics of ongoing living systematic reviews on covid-19, and we follow a life cycle approach to describe key steps in a living systematic review. Results: We identified 97 living systematic reviews on covid-19, published up to 7th November 2022, which focused mostly on the effects of pharmacological interventions (n = 46, 47%) or the prevalence of associated conditions or risk factors (n = 30, 31%). The scopes of several reviews overlapped considerably. Most living systematic reviews included both observational and randomised study designs (n = 45, 46%). Only one-third of the reviews has been updated at least once (n = 34, 35%). We address practical aspects of living systematic reviews including how to judge whether to start a living systematic review, methods for study identification and selection, data extraction and evaluation, and give recommendations at each step, drawing from our own experience. We also discuss when it is time to stop and how to publish updates. Conclusions: Methods to improve the efficiency of searching, study selection, and data extraction using machine learning technologies are being developed, their performance and applicability, particularly for reviews based on observational study designs should improve, and ways of publishing living systematic reviews and their updates will continue to evolve. Finally, knowing when to end a living systematic review is as important as knowing when to start. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Rare superficial vascular anomalies represent a wide range of diseases. Their management is difficult given the broad spectrum and the lack of clinical trials assessing treatment efficacy. A randomized clinical trial of vascular anomalies is difficult because of the rarity of the diseases and is enhanced by the population of interest often being children. Therefore, suitable designs are needed. We conducted a methodological systematic literature search to identify designs implemented for investigating the treatment of rare superficial vascular anomalies. Methods: We conducted a literature search on January 25, 2021, of the PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and European Union Clinical Trials Register databases. This systematic methodological literature search was registered at the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO: CRD42021232449). Randomized and non-randomized studies were included if they met the following criteria: were prospective studies of rare superficial vascular anomaly therapies, dealt with humans (adults and children) and were published in English from 2000. We excluded case reports/case series reporting fewer than 10 patients, reviews, retrospective studies, animal studies, studies of systemic or common vascular anomalies and non-therapeutic studies. We did not assess risk of bias in the included studies because our review was a methodological one focused on the design used. The review provided a descriptive analysis of relevant features of eligible research studies. Results: From 2046 articles identified, we included 97 studies (62 reports and 35 ongoing studies): 25 randomized controlled studies, 7 non-randomized comparative studies, 64 prospective cohorts and 1 case series. Among the 32 comparative studies included, 21 used a parallel-group design. The 11 other studies used different designs such as cross-over, randomized placebo phase, delayed-start, within-person, or challenge–dechallenge–rechallenge or used a historical control group or an observational run-in period. Conclusions: Our systematic literature search highlights the lack of randomized control trials in superficial vascular anomalies due to the rarity of patients and their heterogeneity. New designs are emerging and can overcome the limitations of testing treatments in parallel groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People living with Parkinson's disease experience progressive motor and non-motor symptoms, which negatively impact on health-related quality of life and can lead to an increased risk of hospitalisation. It is increasingly recognised that the current care models are not suitable for the needs of people with parkinsonism whose care needs evolve and change as the disease progresses. This trial aims to evaluate whether a complex and innovative model of integrated care will increase an individual's ability to achieve their personal goals, have a positive impact on health and symptom burden and be more cost-effective when compared with usual care. Methods: This is a single-centre, randomised controlled trial where people with parkinsonism and their informal caregivers are randomised into one of two groups: either PRIME Parkinson multi-component model of care or usual care. Adults ≥18 years with a diagnosis of parkinsonism, able to provide informed consent or the availability of a close friend or relative to act as a personal consultee if capacity to do so is absent and living in the trial geographical area are eligible. Up to three caregivers per patient can also take part, must be ≥18 years, provide informal, unpaid care and able to give informed consent. The primary outcome measure is goal attainment, as measured using the Bangor Goal Setting Interview. The duration of enrolment is 24 months. The total recruitment target is n=214, and the main analyses will be intention to treat. Discussion: This trial tests whether a novel model of care improves health and disease-related metrics including goal attainment and decreases hospitalisations whilst being more cost-effective than the current usual care. Subject to successful implementation of this intervention within one centre, the PRIME Parkinson model of care could then be evaluated within a cluster-randomised trial at multiple centres. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Family practice registered nurses co-managing patient care as healthcare professionals in interdisciplinary primary care teams have been shown to improve access, continuity of care, patient satisfaction, and clinical outcomes for patients with chronic diseases while being cost-effective. Currently, however, it is unclear how different funding models support or hinder the integration of family practice nurses into existing primary health care systems and interdisciplinary practices. This has resulted in the underutilisation of family practice nurses in contributing to high-quality patient care. Methods: This mixed-methods project is comprised of three studies: (1) a funding model analysis; (2) case studies; and (3) an online survey with family practice nurses. The funding model analysis will employ policy scans to identify, describe, and compare the various funding models used in Canada to integrate family practice nurses in primary care. Case studies involving qualitative interviews with clinic teams (family practice nurses, physicians, and administrators) and family practice nurse activity logs will explore the variation of nursing professional practice, training, skill set, and team functioning in British Columbia, Nova Scotia, Ontario, and Quebec. Interview transcripts will be analysed thematically and comparisons will be made across funding models. Activity log responses will be analysed to represent nurses' time spent on independent, dependent, interdependent, or non-nursing work in each funding model. Finally, a cross-sectional online survey of family practice nurses in Canada will examine the relationships between funding models, nursing professional practice, training, skill set, team functioning, and patient care co-management in primary care. We will employ bivariate tests and multivariable regression to examine these relationships in the survey results. Discussion: This project aims to address a gap in the literature on funding models for family practice nurses. In particular, findings will support provincial and territorial governments in structuring funding models that optimise the roles of family practice nurses while establishing evidence about the benefits of interdisciplinary team-based care. Overall, the findings may contribute to the integration and optimisation of family practice nursing within primary health care, to the benefit of patients, primary healthcare providers, and health care systems nationally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To report our recommended methodology for extracting and then confirming research uncertainties - areas where research has failed to answer a research question - derived from previously published literature during a broad scope Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) with the James Lind Alliance (JLA).Methods: This process was completed in the UK as part of the PSP for "Common Conditions Affecting the Hand and Wrist", comprising of health professionals, patients and carers and reports the data (uncertainty) extraction phase of this. The PSP followed the robust methodology dictated by the JLA and sought to identify knowledge gaps, termed "uncertainties" by the JLA. Published Cochrane Systematic Reviews, Guidelines and Protocols, NICE (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) Guidelines, and SIGN (Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network) Guidelines were screened for documented "uncertainties". A robust method of screening, internally verifying and then checking uncertainties was adopted. This included independent screening and data extraction by multiple researchers and use of a PRISMA flowchart, alongside steering group consensus processes. Selection of research uncertainties was guided by the scope of the Common Conditions Affecting the Hand and Wrist PSP which focused on "common" hand conditions routinely treated by hand specialists, including hand surgeons and hand therapists limited to identifying questions concerning the results of intervention, and not the basic science or epidemiology behind disease.Results: Of the 2358 records identified (after removal of duplicates) which entered the screening process, 186 records were presented to the PSP steering group for eligibility assessment; 79 were deemed within scope and included for the purpose of research uncertainty extraction (45 full Cochrane Reviews, 18 Cochrane Review protocols, 16 Guidelines). These yielded 89 research uncertainties, which were compared to the stakeholder survey, and added to the longlist where necessary; before derived uncertainties were checked against non-Cochrane published systematic reviews.Conclusions: In carrying out this work, beyond reporting on output of the Common Conditions Affecting the Hand and Wrist PSP, we detail the methodology and processes we hope can inform and facilitate the work of future PSPs and other evidence reviews, especially those with a broader scope beyond a single disease or condition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scientific advances in the understanding of the genetics and mechanisms of many rare diseases with previously unknown etiologies are inspiring optimism in the patient, clinical, and research communities and there is hope that disease-specific treatments are on the way. However, the rare disease community has reached a critical point in which its increasingly fragmented structure and operating models are threatening its ability to harness the full potential of advancing genomic and computational technologies. Changes are therefore needed to overcome these issues plaguing many rare diseases while also supporting economically viable therapy development. In "Data silos are undermining drug development and failing rare disease patients (Orphanet Journal of Rare Disease, Apr 2021)," we outlined many of the broad issues underpinning the increasingly fragmented and siloed nature of the rare disease space, as well as how the issues encountered by this community are representative of biomedical research more generally. Here, we propose several initiatives for key stakeholders - including regulators, private and public foundations, and research institutions - to reorient the rare disease ecosystem and its incentives in a way that we believe would cultivate and accelerate innovation. Specifically, we propose supporting non-proprietary patient registries, greater data standardization, global regulatory harmonization, and new business models that encourage data sharing and research collaboration as the default mode. Leadership needs to be integrated across sectors to drive meaningful change between patients, industry, sponsors, and academic medical centers. To transform the research and development landscape and unlock its vast healthcare, economic, and scientific potential for rare disease patients, a new model is ultimately the goal for all. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In the COVID-19 pandemic, numerous researchers postponed their patient and public involvement (PPI) activities. This was mainly due to assumptions on patients' willingness and skills to participate digitally. In fact, digital PPI workshops differ from in-person meetings as some forms of non-verbal cues and body language may be missing and technical barriers may exist. Within our project HYPERION-TransCare we adapted our PPI workshop series for intervention development to a digital format and assessed whether these digital workshops were feasible for patients, health care professionals and researchers. Methods: We used a digital meeting tool that included communication via audio, video and chat. Discussions were documented simultaneously on a digital white board. Technical support was provided via phone and chat during the workshops and with a technical introduction workshop in advance. The workshop evaluation encompassed observation protocols, participants' feedback via chat after each workshop on their chance to speak and the usability of the digital tools, and telephone interviews on patients' and health professionals' experiences after the end of the workshop series. Results: Observation protocols showed an active role of moderators in verbally encouraging every participant to get involved. Technical challenges occurred, but were in most cases immediately addressed and solved. Participants median rating of their chance to speak and the usability of the digital tool was "very good". In the evaluation interviews participants reported a change of perspective and mutual understanding as a main benefit from the PPI workshops and described the atmosphere as inclusive and on equal footing. Benefits of the digital format such as overcoming geographical distance, saving time and combining workshop participation with professional or childcare obligations were reported. Technical support was stressed as a pre-condition for getting actively involved in digital PPI. Conclusions: Digital formats using different didactic and documentation techniques, accompanied by technical support, can foster active patient and public involvement. The advantages of digital PPI formats such as geographical flexibility and saving time for participants as well as the opportunity to prepare and hold workshops in geographically stretched research teams persists beyond the pandemic and may in some cases outweigh the advantages of in-person communication. Plain English summary: Digital patient and public involvement (PPI) activities differ from in-person meetings. For example, some forms of non-verbal cues and body language are limited and technical barriers may exist. Therefore, some research teams were hesitant to switch to a digital PPI format during the COVID-19 pandemic and postponed their PPI activities. In this paper, we aim to describe, how we adapted a PPI workshop series to a digital format, how patients and health care professionals experienced these digital workshops, and which conclusions we have drawn for future digital PPI activities. The workshop evaluation encompassed workshop observation protocols, participants' feedback via chat on their chance to speak and the feasibility of the digital tools, and telephone interviews on participants' experiences. The study results showed that moderators had an active role in verbally encouraging every participant to get involved. Technical challenges occurred, but were in most cases immediately addressed and solved. Most participants rated their chance to speak and the feasibility of the digital format as "very good". They described the atmosphere as inclusive and on equal footing without hierarchy between different stakeholder groups. Participants reported benefits of the digital format such as overcoming geographical distance, saving time and combining workshop participation with professional or childcare obligations. They stressed technical support as a condition for getting actively involved in digital PPI. We conclude that some advantages of digital PPI may persist beyond the pandemic. Therefore, we encourage research teams to discuss the question of digital or in-person PPI with the involved patients and health professionals and decide on a case-by-case basis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted non-COVID critical care trials globally as intensive care units (ICUs) prioritized patient care and COVID-specific research. The international randomized controlled trial CYCLE (Critical Care Cycling to Improve Lower Extremity Strength) was forced to halt recruitment at all sites in March 2020, creating immediate challenges. We applied the CONSERVE (CONSORT and SPIRIT Extension for RCTs Revised in Extenuating Circumstance) statement as a framework to report the impact of the pandemic on CYCLE and describe our mitigation approaches.Methods: On March 23, 2020, the CYCLE Methods Centre distributed a standardized email to determine the number of patients still in-hospital and those requiring imminent 90-day endpoint assessments. We assessed protocol fidelity by documenting attempts to provide the in-hospital randomized intervention (cycling or routine physiotherapy) and collect the primary outcome (physical function 3-days post-ICU discharge) and 90-day outcomes. We advised sites to prioritize data for the study's primary outcome. We sought feedback on pandemic barriers related to trial procedures.Results: Our main Methods Centre mitigation strategies included identifying patients at risk for protocol deviations, communicating early and frequently with sites, developing standardized internal tools focused on high-risk points in the protocol for monitoring patient progress, data entry, and validation, and providing guidance to conduct some research activities remotely. For study sites, our strategies included determining how institutional pandemic research policies applied to CYCLE, communicating with the Methods Centre about capacity to continue any part of the research, and developing contingency plans to ensure the protocol was delivered as intended. From 15 active sites (12 Canada, 2 US, 1 Australia), 5 patients were still receiving the study intervention in ICUs, 6 required primary outcomes, and 17 required 90-day assessments. With these mitigation strategies, we attempted 100% of ICU interventions, 83% of primary outcomes, and 100% of 90-day assessments per our protocol.Conclusions: We retained all enrolled patients with minimal missing data using several time-sensitive strategies. Although CONSERVE recommends reporting only major modifications incurred by extenuating circumstances, we suggest that it also provides a helpful framework for reporting mitigation strategies with the goal of improving research transparency and trial management.Trial Registration: NCT03471247. Registered on March 20, 2018. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Process evaluations are increasingly integrated into randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of complex interventions to document their delivery and interactions with local systems and dynamics, helping understand observed health outcomes. Yet process evaluations often struggle to assess relevant contextual determinants, leaving much of the important role of "context" in shaping an intervention's mechanisms opaque in many studies. A lack of easily adapted data collection methods to help define and operationalise indicators of context likely contributes to this., Methods: We present a method to help structure measures of context in process evaluations and describe its use in two very different settings. The "Context Tracker" is an innovative tool for use within trials and quasi-experiments to more systematically capture and understand key dimensions of context. It was developed in Zimbabwe as part of a cluster randomised controlled trial and then adapted for a quasi-experimental evaluation in the UK. Both studies provided harm reduction and health services for marginalised and hard-to-reach populations., Results: We developed the Context Tracker to be both standardised (i.e. formatted and applied in the same way across study sites) and flexible enough to allow unique features to be explored in greater detail. Drawing on the Context and Implementation of Complex Interventions (CICI) and Risk Environments frameworks, we mapped 5 domains across micro, meso and macro levels in a simple table and used existing evidence and experience to predict factors likely to affect delivery of and participation in intervention components. We tracked these over time across study sites using routine programme statistics, observation and qualitative methods. The Context Tracker enables identification and comparison of facilitators and barriers to implementation, variations in engagement with interventions, and how mechanisms of action are (or are not) triggered in different settings., Conclusions: The Context Tracker is one example of how evidence-based contextual determinants can be used to guide data collection and analysis within process evaluations. It is relevant in low- and high-income settings and applicable to both qualitative and quantitative analyses. While perhaps most useful to process evaluations of complex interventions targeting marginalised communities, the broader approach would benefit a more general research audience., Competing Interests: Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate The AMETHIST study received ethical approval from the Medical Research Council of Zimbabwe (MRCZ/A/2559), Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine (19-115RS) and London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (19123). The SIPP study received ethical approval from the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Research Ethics Committee (28102). Consent for publication Not applicable. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background and Aims: Interstitial lung diseases (ILDs), encompassing both pediatric and adult cases, present a diverse spectrum of chronic conditions with variable prognosis. Despite limited therapeutic options beyond antifibrotic drugs and immunosuppressants, accurate diagnosis is challenging, often necessitating invasive procedures that may not be feasible for certain patients. Drawn against this background, experts across pediatric and adult ILD fields have joined forces in the RARE-ILD initiative to pioneer novel non-invasive diagnostic algorithms and biomarkers. Collaborating with the RARE-ILD consortium, the eurILDreg aims to comprehensively describe different ILDs, analyze genetically defined forms across age groups, create innovative diagnostic and therapeutic biomarkers, and employ artificial intelligence for data analysis., Methods: The foundation of eurILDreg is built on a comprehensive parameter list developed and adopted by clinical experts, encompassing over 1,800 distinct parameters related to patient history, clinical examinations, diagnosis, lung function and biospecimen collection. This robust dataset is further enriched with daily assessments captured through the patientMpower app, including handheld spirometry and exercise tests, conducted on approximately 350 patients over the course of a year. This approach involves app-based daily assessments of quality of life, symptom tracking, handheld spirometry, saturation measurement, and the 1-min sit-to-stand test (1-STST). Additionally, pediatric data from the ChILD-EU registry will be integrated into the RARE-ILD Data Warehouse, with the ultimate goal of including a total of 4.000 ILD patients and over 100.000 biospecimen., Discussion: The collaborative efforts within the consortium are poised to streamline research endeavors significantly, promising to advance patient-centered care, foster innovation, and shape the future landscape of interstitial lung disease research and healthcare practices., Trial Registration: EurILDreg is registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS 00028968, 26.07.2022), and eurIPFreg is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02951416)., Competing Interests: Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate The ethics committee of the Justus Liebig University of Giessen has approved the eurILDreg as extension of eurIPFreg under protocol reference number 111/08. Additionally, approval from the medical ethics committee at each participating site will be obtained prior to patient inclusion. Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants. The study will be conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Consent for publication All authors gave their consent for publication. Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The benefits of randomised trials are not shared equally, and people from ethnic minority groups are a key constituency under-served by clinical research and clinical care. The STRIDE project aimed to give trialists practical information about how to decide which ethnic groups should be in their trials, and at what proportion., Methods: We considered trials in six clinical areas: cancer, cardiovascular, diabetes, maternal health, mental health, and smoking cessation. We created a summary for each, including participants-intervention-comparators-outcomes, and data on disease prevalence by ethnicity. These were discussed with panels with clinical expertise, trial and methodology expertise, lived experience, funding, and experience of working with and on behalf of ethnic communities. For each trial, we asked panel members to decide which ethnic groups should have been involved and at what proportion., Results: We discussed 23 trials with 40 individual panel members. Panels found our questions difficult to answer. The lack of publicly available data on prevalence by ethnicity was central to this. Where data were available, decision-making was easier but not simple. The discussions led to eight STRIDE recommendations. We recommend that discussions involve diverse teams and that discussions need time, with access to the best available data. In the absence of data or consensus, we recommend the adoption of 'default' minimum rates of inclusion, with oversampling considered. These discussions should inform site selection, and the practical challenges of recruitment and retention should not determine which groups are to be included. We also suggest five policy initiatives to support implementation of the recommendations. Broadly, these are (1) funders need to signal that ethnic diversity is expected, (2) trial teams need access to better data, (3) funders and others need to signal that ethnic diversity means better science, (4) more funding is needed for evaluation, and (5) Good Clinical Practice training should cover ethnic diversity., Conclusions: Agreeing targets for which ethnic groups to involve in a trial is essential but difficult. Our eight recommendations could help to make trials more ethnically diverse if followed, and we suggest five policy initiatives that would create a supportive environment for their implementation., Competing Interests: Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate Ethics approval was not required for this work. Members of the public who took part did so as patient and public partners helping to drive and shape the work, not as research participants. Consent for publication Not applicable for this article. Competing interests KK is Director for Centre for Ethnic Health Research, University of Leicester, UK. ST is an Editor-in-Chief of Trials. All other authors declare no competing interests., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Patients with kidney failure often lack robust evidence because they are excluded from randomized trials. Trial emulation provides an alternative approach to derive treatment effect estimates when randomized trials cannot be conducted. Critical questions about the comparative efficacy and safety of interventions in kidney failure are now being answered using this approach or parts of it. However, variations and inconsistencies in reporting cast doubt on the reliability and validity of effect estimates not derived from randomized trials. The aim of this methodological systematic review is to understand the extent to which the target study approach is used in kidney failure and the appropriateness of this approach. By identifying and evaluating studies that qualify as emulating a target trial, compared with studies that did not apply the principles. We aim to provide more specific methodological guidance to increase the clarity and reliability of reporting treatment effect estimates when running a trial in kidney failure is not feasible., Methods: This protocol is developed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA-P) statement. MEDLINE, Embase, and reference lists (backwards citation chasing) will be searched up until 1st July 2023 and the search updated prior to publication to identify all studies evaluating patient outcomes in late-stage kidney disease and failure that use target trial emulation as the primary approach for analysis. Two authors (A. A., P. K.) will select articles based on title and abstract and then full text, with a third reviewer settling disagreements (J. P.). The prespecified variables will be extracted, and the risk of bias will be assessed by at least two authors (A. A., P. K., A. N.) using prespecified data forms. This will enable the determination of the robustness of the methodological quality of observational studies in using the whole or elements of the target trial approach. We will thereby assess their ability to reliably report treatment effect estimates., Discussion: We will provide specific methodological recommendations on how to design target trials and model assumptions for emulation to get reliable treatment effect estimates for therapeutic interventions in kidney failure., Methodological Systematic Review Registration: Open Science Framework: Identifier https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/Z4Y29 ., Competing Interests: Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate The protocol plan does not contain active involvement of participants which would require ethical consent. Consent for publication Not applicable. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objective: The objective of this study was to establish a zone of clinical equipoise for the Proximal FEmur Resection or Internal Fixation fOR Metastases (PERFORM) randomized controlled trial, which will compare resection and endoprosthetic reconstruction to internal fixation for skeletal metastases of the proximal femur., Methods: A survey was developed, piloted, and distributed to self-declared interested stakeholders in the PERFORM trial. The survey targeted orthopedic oncologists and was designed to assess patient and bone lesion characteristics that drive surgical decision-making in the treatment of skeletal metastases in the proximal femur. An Ethics Waiver was obtained at the lead academic institution and data was collected in the REDCap survey database., Results: Responses were complete from 76 surgeons across North America, South America, Europe, Asia, and Africa. Response rate from self-declared interested stakeholders was 70%, with additional responses collected from a broader international audience. Responses indicate that a study population for which either resection and endoprosthetic reconstruction or internal fixation are acceptable options include (1) life expectancy at least 6 months, (2) bone loss of no more than 75% and no less than 25%, and (3) minimal to moderate risk for perioperative complications. Ninety-three percent of respondents indicated that they would be interested in participating in the PERFORM trial., Conclusion: A preliminary zone of equipoise for the PERFORM trial includes patients with 25-75% bone loss, low to moderate risk of operative complications, and life expectancy of at least 6 months. Further stakeholder discussions have finalized the PERFORM trial protocol prior to study initiation., Competing Interests: Ethics approval and consent to participate An Ethics Waiver for this study was obtained at the lead academic institution. Consent for participation was inferred by survey completion. Consent for publication Consent for publication of survey data was inferred by survey completion. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Key informant interviews (KII) are a widely used method in qualitative health research to gain in-depth insights from individuals with specialized knowledge, experience, or access that is crucial to the research topic. However, there is growing criticism regarding how the selection of key informants is insufficiently described in research. This opacity is problematic as the authority and knowledge of key informants may be given undue weight in research findings, potentially overshadowing other non-expert samples. The resulting imbalance in representation can lead to favoring certain viewpoints while marginalizing others, and thereby reinforcing existing inequities., Methods: Using our KII study as an example, we demonstrate how we initially composed an ideal sample based on theoretical considerations and subsequently operationalized it in the field. We employed a selective recruitment strategy informed by intersectional theory, targeting physicians with migration backgrounds from Middle Eastern countries for a study on cancer prevention and screening. Our recruitment process combined direct methods, including database searches and email outreach, with indirect methods like snowball sampling and engagement with multipliers. The recruitment strategy was iterative, allowing for ongoing assessment and adaptation to ensure a diverse and representative sample., Results: The KII study successfully recruited 21 physicians with diverse social categories, including different genders, migration backgrounds, language skills, and medical specialties. Direct recruitment was more effective than indirect methods and allowed for greater control in reaching out to specific subsamples. It highlights the importance of flexible and persistent recruitment strategies to achieve the desired sample., Conclusions: This KII study underscores the interplay between methodological ideals and the practical realities of recruiting a diverse, carefully composed sample of key informants in health research. Our intersectional approach aimed to ensure equitable representation by considering power dynamics and refining recruitment strategies, while balancing the challenges of real-world fieldwork-such as engaging busy physicians with specific recruitment criteria-with practical adaptability. Our KII study emphasizes the need for ongoing reflexivity to balance ideality and equity with practical feasibility., Competing Interests: Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate The research project was granted ethical clearance by the ethical board of Bielefeld University (No. 2022 − 181). Prospective participants from all samples received an information sheet, detailing their role, rights, type of data collection, data protection, and a consent form. Informed consent was obtained from all research participants. Invitations to attend any of the study components were extended to participants solely upon receipt of their signed consent forms. All our procedures have been performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments. Clinical trial number Not applicable. Consent for publication Written consent for publication was obtained from all study participants. Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Pragmatic randomized controlled trials are getting more interest to improve trials' external validity. This study aimed to assess how pragmatic the design of the self-labelled pragmatic randomised controlled trials in the manual therapy field is., Methods: We searched MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for self-labelled pragmatic randomised controlled trials in the manual therapy field until January 2024 were included. Two independent reviewers collected and extracted data related to the intention of the trial, the rationale for the intervention, and specific features of the trial and performed an assessment using the PRECIS-2 tool., Results: Of 39 self-labelled pragmatic trials, the mean PRECIS-2 score was 3.5 (SD: 0.6). Choice of outcome measures, how the interventions were performed, the follow-up of the participants and how all the available data were included in the statistical analysis were the domains rated as most 'pragmatic'. Participants' eligibility, recruitment, and setting obtained lower scores. Less than 25% of the trials claimed that the aim was to investigate an intervention under real-world conditions and to make clinical decisions about its effectiveness. In the 21% of the sample the authors described neither the proof-of-concept of the intervention nor the state of previous studies addressing related research questions., Conclusions: Self-labelled pragmatic randomised controlled trials showed a moderately pragmatic attitude. Beyond the label 'pragmatic', the description of the intention of the trial and the context of every PRECIS-2 domain is crucial to understanding the real pragmatism of a trial., Competing Interests: Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate Not applicable. Consent for publication Not applicable. Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Family caregivers of people with dementia are a distinct group due to the particularly stressful and time-intensive care situation at home. Despite these challenges, involving them in research is crucial to better understand and address their specific needs. However, little evidence exists regarding a tailored approach for researchers for this group considering their situation at home., Methods: A scoping review will be conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodological guidance, including the databases MEDLINE (PubMed), CINAHL, Scopus (Elsevier), and PsycINFO (EBSCO). The review will include family caregivers of people with dementia, regardless of age, gender, or ethnicity, who have been actively involved in research throughout the research process. Moreover, sources of evidence from any country in both English and German are eligible for inclusion. Sources will be screened by two independent reviewers. Results will be extracted using a tailored charting tool and presented in the final report according to the research questions and objectives., Discussion: Developing a tailored approach to involve family caregivers of people with dementia in research and development has profound importance to both the scientific community and the target group itself., Systematic Review Registration: Open Science Framework https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/PMZYV ., Competing Interests: Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate N.A. Consent for publication N.A. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Increasing global interest in natural therapies has led to a rise in the use of herbal medicines for managing various ailments. However, concerns about scientific evaluation have prompted a study aiming to assess the study design of herbal medicine clinical trials. This study aimed to provide a descriptive overview of the study design, characteristics, and methodologies of contemporary herbal medicine clinical trials., Materials and Methods: The study reviewed herbal medicine clinical trials published between 2019 and 2022 in five electronic databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Sciences, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library. Data extraction included study characteristics, intervention details, study design, outcome measures, trial phases, blinding, and other relevant information, with descriptive analyses presented. The term 'herbal medicines' in this study refers to herbs, herbal materials, preparations, and finished products containing active ingredients from plant parts or their combinations., Results: Out of the initially identified 5,918 records, 1,517 articles were eligible for inclusion in the study. The majority of herbal medicine clinical trials were conducted in Asian countries, covering a range of diseases. A randomized, double-blind, parallel design with a 1:1 allocation ratio was frequently employed, along with the common use of placebos across all trial phases. Capsules were the most common dosage form. The median number of human participants varied across trial phases, ranging from 50 in Phase 1 to 240 in Phase 4., Conclusions: The analysis observed that herbal medicine clinical trials employed randomized, double-blind, parallel designs, and the widespread use of placebo. Our observations provided valuable insights into the evolving landscape of herbal medicine clinical trials., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Incorporating backfill cohorts in phase I oncology trials is a recently developed strategy for dose optimization. However, the efficacy assessment window is long in general, causing a lag in identifying ineffective doses and more patients being backfilled to those doses. There is necessity to investigate how to use patient-reported outcomes (PRO) to determine doses for backfill cohorts., Methods: We propose a unified Bayesian design framework, called 'Backfill-QoL', to utilize patient-reported quality of life (QoL) data into phase I oncology trials with backfill cohorts, including methods for trial monitoring, algorithm for dose-finding, and criteria for dose selection. Simulation studies and sensitivity analyses are conducted to evaluate the proposed Backfill-QoL design., Results: The simulation studies demonstrate that the Backfill-QoL design is more efficient than traditional dose-expansion strategy, and fewer patients would be allocated to doses with unacceptable QoL profiles. A user-friendly Windows desktop application is developed and freely available for implementing the proposed design., Conclusions: The Backfill-QoL design enables continuous monitoring of safety, efficacy and QoL outcomes, and the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) can be identified in a more patient-centered perspective., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is a major risk factor for delirium. Few studies with mid- to long-term follow-up periods have examined delirium, MCI, and the conversion of MCI to dementia. This prospective, longitudinal cohort study aims to assess the incidence of dementia after delirium onset in patients with MCI and to develop an artificial intelligence algorithm for predicting the conversion of MCI to dementia., Methods: A 30-day evaluation for delirium will be performed for adults aged ≥ 65 years diagnosed with MCI who score 18-23 on the Korean Mini-Mental State Exam. Individuals exhibiting delirium at least once will be classified into the delirium group and the remainder into the non-delirium group. Over 3 years, patients will undergo follow-ups for survival and conversion to dementia at 30-day intervals to analyze risk factors for delirium and clinical outcomes. Differences between the two groups will be analyzed using the chi-square and independent t-tests. Kaplan-Meier survival and Cox proportional hazard regression will be used to assess the effects on 30-day, 60-day, 12-month, 24-month, and 36-month mortality, whereas linear regression will be used to assess the length of stay at long-term care facilities and medical costs., Discussion: The results will emphasize the importance of preventing delirium in MCI patients, and preventive interventions can be strengthened., Trial Registration: NCT05113446 (ClinicalTrials.gov). Registered 9 November 2021 - Retrospectively registered., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: A cluster randomised trial is a randomised controlled trial in which groups of individuals (clusters) are randomised to treatment arms. Stepped wedge cluster randomised trials are a type of cluster randomised trial where clusters are randomised to sequences. These trial designs are important for impacting decision-making, and it is therefore important that they be well-conducted and reported., Main Body: In November 2018, we created a new website dedicated to cluster randomised trials, including stepped wedge designs: https://clusterrandomisedtrials.qmul.ac.uk/ . The idea for the website emerged from the conference on Current Developments in Cluster Randomised Trials and Stepped Wedge Designs held in November 2016 at Queen Mary University of London, with the aim to provide an online resource to facilitate quality trials and methodological research on these types of trial. The website is divided into sections covering Design, Analysis and Reporting for traditional (i.e. parallel two-arm) cluster randomised trials and stepped wedge designs and contains resources in the form of hyperlinks to relevant papers along with brief explanations. A noticeboard page provides details on announcements, events, and past events., Conclusion: We aim to keep the site updated with the latest publications and events related to cluster randomised trials, and welcome suggestions from the research community on further resources or events to add. We hope that the site will facilitate high-quality traditional and stepped wedge cluster randomised trials., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The use of historical external control data in clinical trials has grown in interest and needs when considering the design of future trials. Hybrid control designs can be more efficient to achieve the same power with fewer patients and limited resources. The literature is sparse on appropriate statistical methods which can account for the differences between historical external controls and the control patients in a study. In this article, we illustrate the analysis framework of a clinical trial if a hybrid control design was used after determining an RCT may not be feasible., Methods: We utilize two previously completed RCTs in nonsquamous NSCLC and a nationwide electronic health record derived de-identified database as examples and compare 5 analysis methods on each trial, as well as a set of simulations to determine operating characteristics of such designs., Results: In single trial estimation, the Case Weighted Adaptive Power Prior provided estimated treatment hazard ratios consistent with the original trial's conclusions with narrower confidence intervals. The simulation studies showed that the Case Weighted Adaptive Power Prior achieved the highest power (and well controlled type-1 error) across all 5 methods with consistent study sample size., Conclusions: By following the proposed hybrid control framework, one can design a hybrid control trial transparently and accounting for differences between control groups while controlling type-1 error and still achieving efficiency gains from the additional contribution from external controls., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Enough is known about self-regulation to establish it as a priority target for education and intervention efforts beginning in early childhood, yet not enough to meaningfully and reliably alter developmental trajectories. Rather than resigning our aspirations, we need more nuanced and integrative understanding of self-regulation abilities and change., Methods: Launching in 2024, SPROUTS is a 3-year longitudinal study of early self-regulation, beginning in the pre-school period (3-5 years old at Wave 1) with retrospective data back to birth and annual data collection across the transition to school period (ages 5-7 years at Wave 3). Data will be collected on children's self-regulation, related abilities, outcomes, as well as prior and current contexts. One nested study within each Wave-that contributes complementary insights via supplementary and in-depth methods and data-will enable further exploration of contemporary issues related to self-regulation., Discussion: Insights generated can potentiate more effective intervention and education efforts by: improving intervention cost-benefit ratios; identifying likely mechanisms of change; easing burdens of unhealthy and antisocial behaviours associated with low self-regulation; and, most importantly, contributing to giving children the best early start to life. These benefits are timely in the context of intense policy and educational interest in fostering children's self-regulation., Trial Registration: Open Science Framework: osf.io/maqdg. Date of registration: 26 Sep 2024., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Evaluation approaches such as ripple effects mapping (REM) and realist evaluation have emerged as popular methodologies to evidence impact, and the processes of change within public health as part of whole systems approaches. Despite the various examples of their implementation across different evaluation settings, there has been little or no evidence of how they might be effective when combined., Methods: With REM's potential to pragmatically illustrate impact, and realist evaluation's strength to identify how and why impacts emerge, this paper develops a rationale and process for their amalgamation. Following this, we outline a realist-informed ripple effects mapping (RREM) protocol drawing upon a physical activity based case study in Essex that may be suitable for application within evaluation settings in a range of public health, whole system and physical activity settings., Discussion: Combining these two approaches has the potential to more effectively illuminate the impacts that we see within public health and whole system approaches and initiatives. What is more, given the complexity often imbued within these approaches and initiatives, they hold capability for also capturing the causal mechanisms that explain these impacts., Conclusions: It is our conclusion that when combined, this novel approach may help to inspire future research as well as more effective evaluation of public health and whole system approaches. This is crucial if we are to foster a culture for learning, refinement and reflection., (© 2024. Crown.)

Background: Cluster randomized trials (CRTs) are increasingly important for evaluating interventions embedded in health care systems. An essential parameter in sample size calculation to detect both overall and heterogeneous treatment effects for CRTs is the intra-cluster correlation coefficient (ICC) of both outcome and covariates of interest. However, obtaining advance estimates for the ICC can be challenging. When trial outcomes will be obtained from routinely collected data sources, there is an opportunity to obtain reliable ICC estimates in advance of the trial. Using USA national Medicare data, we estimated ICCs for a range of outcomes to inform the design of CRTs for people living with Alzheimer's and related dementias (ADRD)., Method: Data from 2018 Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries, specifically, 1,898,812 individuals (≥ 65 years) with diagnosis of ADRD within 3436 hospital service areas (treated as clusters) and 306 hospital referral regions (treated as fixed strata), were used to calculate unadjusted and adjusted ICC estimates for three outcomes: death, any hospitalizations, and any emergency department (ED) visits and three covariates: age, race and sex. We present both overall and stratum-specific ICC estimates. We illustrate their use in sample size calculations for overall treatment effects as well as detecting treatment effect heterogeneity., Results: The unadjusted overall ICCs for death, hospitalizations, and ED visits were 0.001, 0.010, and 0.017 respectively. Stratum-specific ICCs varied widely across the 306 HRRs: median 0.001, 0.010 and 0.025 for death, hospitalizations, and ED visits respectively and 0.007, 0.001, and 0.080 for age, sex and race. An interactive R Shiny app is provided that allows users to retrieve estimates overlayed on a map of the USA., Conclusions: We presented both adjusted and unadjusted ICCs for outcomes as well as unadjusted ICCs for covariates of potential interest from population-level data in the USA and demonstrated how the estimates may be used in sample size calculations for CRTs in ADRD., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Neonatal septic shock represents a critical and life-threatening condition that necessitates immediate and personalized interventions. Prior research endeavors have been undertaken to inform the optimization of neonatal septic shock management, yet substantial heterogeneity prevails in the selection, measurement, and reporting of outcomes across relevant studies. The heterogeneity in outcome selections and measures impedes the comparability of results and the synthesis of evidence, thus contributing to suboptimal utilization of research findings. This protocol presents the methodology for identifying and developing a Core Outcome Set for Neonatal Septic Shock Management (COS-NSS), intended for use in both research and routine clinical practice. A rigorous four-stage approach will be employed to develop the COS-NSS. In Stage 1, a scoping review will be conducted to compile a list of currently reported outcomes for neonatal septic shock management. Stage 2 will involve an expert stakeholder meeting using a semi-structured discussion approach to elucidate all identified outcomes and outcome domains, as well as to gather any additional outcomes. Moving to Stage 3, a two-round e-Delphi survey involving a wide variety of stakeholders will be undertaken to elicit diverse perspectives on the level of importance assigned to each proposed outcome. Finally, in Stage 4, the results of the Delphi study will be discussed in a consensus meeting to determine and agree on the final list of outcomes that will constitute the COS-NSS., Discussion: The stagewise approach integrates research evidence with multi-stakeholder perspectives to establish standardized outcomes that would improve consistency across neonatal septic shock trials. The development and uptake of the COS-NSS will facilitate effective comparison of studies, allowing for study synthesis and generation of high-quality evidence, thus ultimately fostering enhanced medical care for neonates suffering from septic shock., Trial Registration: Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) Initiative database registration: 2766 . Registered on July 19th, 2023., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Unintended pregnancy, a pregnancy that have been either unwanted or mistimed, is a serious public health issue. The present study aims to design and implement interventions to improve unplanned pregnancy experiences., Methods/design: This exploratory sequential mixed method study will be conducted in three phases: qualitative, intermediate, and quantitative. The qualitative phase will use qualitative conventional content analysis with in-depth and semi structured individual interviews to explain and define the components and elements of pregnancy experiences of unplanned pregnancies, which include mothers with unplanned pregnancies, their spouses, and prenatal care providers, who will be selected purposefully. Additionally, in the initial phase, the study will employ literature reviews alongside qualitative findings to elucidate the components and elements of pregnancy experiences and their improving interventions. In the second phase, appropriate interventions (prioritized and feasible) will be determined through an expert panel using the Delphi technique. In the third phase, the intervention program agreed upon in the previous phase will be implemented in the form of a randomized controlled clinical trial., Discussion: The implementation of the interventions could be beneficial in changing attitudes and achieving positive experiences in unplanned pregnancies. It is anticipated that the design and implementation of the intervention program aimed at improving the experiences of unplanned pregnancies will be effective in minimizing adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. Trial registration Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT): (IRCT20170506033834N12/Date of registration: 2024‑02‑12)., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Stepped-wedge cluster trials (SW-CTs) describe a cluster trial design where treatment rollout is staggered over the course of the trial. Clusters are commonly randomized to receive treatment beginning at different time points in this study design (commonly referred to as a Stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial; SW-CRT), but they can also be non-randomized. Trials with this design regularly have a low number of clusters and can be vulnerable to covariate imbalance. To address such covariate imbalance, previous work has examined covariate-constrained randomization and analysis adjustment for imbalanced covariates in mixed-effects models. These methods require the imbalanced covariate to always be known and measured. In contrast, the fixed-effects model automatically adjusts for all imbalanced time-invariant covariates, both measured and unmeasured, and has been implicated to have proper type I error control in SW-CTs with a small number of clusters and binary outcomes., Methods: We present a simulation study comparing the performance of the fixed-effects model against the mixed-effects model in randomized and non-randomized SW-CTs with small numbers of clusters and continuous outcomes. Additionally, we compare these models in scenarios with cluster-level covariate imbalances or confounding., Results: We found that the mixed-effects model can have low coverage probabilities and inflated type I error rates in SW-CTs with continuous outcomes, especially with a small number of clusters or when the ICC is low. Furthermore, mixed-effects models with a Satterthwaite or Kenward-Roger small sample correction can still result in inflated or overly conservative type I error rates, respectively. In contrast, the fixed-effects model consistently produced the target level of coverage probability and type I error rates without dramatically compromising power. Furthermore, the fixed-effects model was able to automatically account for all time-invariant cluster-level covariate imbalances and confounding to robustly yield unbiased estimates., Conclusions: We recommend the fixed-effects model for robust analysis of SW-CTs with a small number of clusters and continuous outcomes, due to its proper type I error control and ability to automatically adjust for all potential imbalanced time-invariant cluster-level covariates and confounders., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Australia's clinical trials sector is highly productive with continued sector investment needed to enhance research impact. Generating economic evidence alongside trials has the potential to facilitate the implementation of trial results into practice. Ascertaining the use of health economic evaluations alongside clinical trials can assist in determining whether clinical trials fully realize and operationalize their potential to change policy and practice. The aims of this study were to ascertain the uptake of health economic evaluations alongside Australian-led clinical trials and explore associations between uptake and trial characteristics., Methods: This observational study comprised a descriptive analysis of clinical trials registries, a cross-sectional survey of Australian Clinical Trials Alliance (ACTA) networks, and a subgroup analysis of completed acute care trials. Descriptive analyses of trial registrations were conducted, with logistic regressions used to identify predictors of proposing and subsequently publishing a health economic evaluation alongside acute care trials., Results: Few randomized Australian-led clinical trials (11% of 9251) and ACTA network trials (43% of 227) proposed a health economic evaluation. In the subgroup analysis, 22% of the 324 acute care trials and 53% of the 38 ACTA network acute care trials proposed a health economic evaluation. Acute care trials funded by government bodies were significantly more likely to propose and publish a health economic evaluation than those funded by hospitals, universities, and other funders, after adjusting for phase, registration year, primary sponsor type, and comparator., Conclusions: Current uptake of health economic evaluations alongside Australian-led clinical trials is low, with uptake higher among the subset of ACTA network trials. This is despite economic evidence playing an increasingly prominent role in health system management, as well as rising health expenditure, limited budgets, and competing demands. There is significant opportunity to embed health economic evaluations alongside clinical trials, particularly phase 3 trials, to increase research outputs and optimize research translation. Investing in clinical trial networks that support funding for a health economist or a health economic evaluation may be an effective strategy to increase the uptake of health economic evaluations alongside trials., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The association between cancer and multiple sclerosis has long been investigated. Several studies and reviews have examined the risk of cancer among patients with multiple sclerosis treated with disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) but with conflicting results. This study will aim to investigate the association between DMTs for multiple sclerosis and subsequent cancer risk using research synthesis methods., Methods/design: We designed and registered a study protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis. We will include randomised and non-randomised trials, prospective or retrospective cohort studies, and case-control studies of treatment with DMTs compared with placebo, no treatment, or another active agent. The primary outcome will be the risk of cancer (all-malignant neoplasms) in association with the exposure of DMTs. Secondary outcomes will include site-specific cancers (e.g. breast cancer). Literature searches will be conducted in multiple electronic databases (from their inception onwards), including the following: PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Two researchers will screen all citations, full-text articles, and abstract data independently. The risk of bias (quality) of individual studies will be appraised using an appropriate tool. If feasible, we will use a two-stage approach to evidence synthesis: (1) Peto's method for meta-analysis of data from randomised trials alone; and (2) Random-effects model for meta-analysis adding data from non-randomised studies. We will calculate odds ratios and their associated 95% confidence intervals. Potential sources of heterogeneity will be explored in additional analyses (e.g. subgroups considering different DMTs individually, mechanism of action, type of control, length of follow-up, mode of treatment)., Discussion: This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised and non-randomised studies will provide an updated synthesis of the risk of cancer associated with DMTs for adult patients with multiple sclerosis. This study will also examine some factors that may explain potential variations across studies. The findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal., Systematic Review Registration: Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/v4sez )., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Traditional medical research infrastructures relying on the Centers of Excellence (CoE) model (an infrastructure or shared facility providing high standards of research excellence and resources to advance scientific knowledge) are often limited by geographic reach regarding patient accessibility, presenting challenges for study recruitment and accrual. Thus, the development of novel, patient-centered (PC) strategies (e.g., the use of online technologies) to support recruitment and streamline study procedures are necessary. This research focused on an implementation evaluation of a design innovation with implementation outcomes as communicated by study staff and patients for CoE and PC approaches for a randomized controlled trial (RCT) for patients with vasculitis., Methods: In-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with 32 individuals (17 study team members, 15 patients). Transcripts were coded using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR)., Results: The following CFIR elements emerged: characteristics of the intervention, inner setting, characteristics of individuals, and process. From the staff perspective, the communication of the PC approach was a major challenge, but should have been used as an opportunity to identify one "point person" in charge of all communicative elements among the study team. Study staff from both arms were highly supportive of the PC approach and saw its promise, particularly regarding online consent procedures. Patients reported high self-efficacy in reference to the PC approach and utilization of online technologies. Local physicians were integral for making patients feel comfortable about participation in research studies., Conclusions: The complexity of replicating the interpersonal nature of the CoE model in the virtual setting is substantial, meaning the PC approach should be viewed as a hybrid strategy that integrates online and face-to-face practices., Trial Registrations: 1) Name: The Assessment of Prednisone In Remission Trial - Centers of Excellence Approach (TAPIR)., Trial Registration Number: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01940094 . Date of registration: September 10, 2013. 2) Name: The Assessment of Prednisone In Remission Trial - Patient Centric Approach (TAPIR)., Trial Registration Number: Clinical Trials.gov NCT01933724 . Date of registration: September 2, 2013., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Systematic review with meta-analysis integrates findings from multiple studies, offering robust conclusions on treatment effects and guiding evidence-based medicine. However, the process is often hampered by challenges such as inconsistent data reporting, complex calculations, and time constraints. Researchers must convert various statistical measures into a common format, which can be error-prone and labor-intensive without the right tools., Implementation: Meta-Analysis Accelerator was developed to address these challenges. The tool offers 21 different statistical conversions, including median & interquartile range (IQR) to mean & standard deviation (SD), standard error of the mean (SEM) to SD, and confidence interval (CI) to SD for one and two groups, among others. It is designed with an intuitive interface, ensuring that users can navigate the tool easily and perform conversions accurately and efficiently. The website structure includes a home page, conversion page, request a conversion feature, about page, articles page, and privacy policy page. This comprehensive design supports the tool's primary goal of simplifying the meta-analysis process., Results: Since its initial release in October 2023 as Meta Converter and subsequent renaming to Meta-Analysis Accelerator, the tool has gained widespread use globally. From March 2024 to May 2024, it received 12,236 visits from countries such as Egypt, France, Indonesia, and the USA, indicating its international appeal and utility. Approximately 46% of the visits were direct, reflecting its popularity and trust among users., Conclusions: Meta-Analysis Accelerator significantly enhances the efficiency and accuracy of meta-analysis of systematic reviews by providing a reliable platform for statistical data conversion. Its comprehensive variety of conversions, user-friendly interface, and continuous improvements make it an indispensable resource for researchers. The tool's ability to streamline data transformation ensures that researchers can focus more on data interpretation and less on manual calculations, thus advancing the quality and ease of conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The standard approach to local inconsistency assessment typically relies on testing the conflict between the direct and indirect evidence in selected treatment comparisons. However, statistical tests for inconsistency have low power and are subject to misinterpreting a p-value above the significance threshold as evidence of consistency., Methods: We propose a simple framework to interpret local inconsistency based on the average Kullback-Leibler divergence (KLD) from approximating the direct with the corresponding indirect estimate and vice versa. Our framework uses directly the mean and standard error (or posterior mean and standard deviation) of the direct and indirect estimates obtained from a local inconsistency method to calculate the average KLD measure for selected comparisons. The average KLD values are compared with a semi-objective threshold to judge the inconsistency as acceptably low or material. We exemplify our novel interpretation approach using three networks with multiple treatments and multi-arm studies., Results: Almost all selected comparisons in the networks were not associated with statistically significant inconsistency at a significance level of 5%. The proposed interpretation framework indicated 14%, 66%, and 75% of the selected comparisons with an acceptably low inconsistency in the corresponding networks. Overall, information loss was more notable when approximating the posterior density of the indirect estimates with that of the direct estimates, attributed to indirect estimates being more imprecise., Conclusions: Using the concept of information loss between two distributions alongside a semi-objectively defined threshold helped distinguish target comparisons with acceptably low inconsistency from those with material inconsistency when statistical tests for inconsistency were inconclusive., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Investigator-initiated clinical studies (IICSs), also referred to as non-commercial, academic or independent clinical studies, address important research questions that are usually neglected by industry despite their high societal value. Indeed, industry may direct their focus and resources on studies that will yield results and products that can ultimately generate revenue for the company. Conversely, IICS research questions include (a) refining or getting new indications of available treatments (drug repurposing); (b) optimisation, by comparing various health products or treatment regimens; and (c) innovation, especially for advanced therapies. Multinational IICSs increase the scientific quality of the data by exchange of research ideas, scientific techniques and tools. Participation of patients from different geographical, social and ethnic backgrounds equally adds to the value of study results and yields more generalisable evidence than a study confined to a single geographical location. Multinational IICSs are generally sponsored by non-profit/academic organisations and publicly funded. Funding has been already identified as a main challenge for the conduct IICS and especially for clinical trials (IICTs, IICS where a medical intervention is directly tested). Main barriers to the conduct of multinational IICTs with public funding include: Limitations of budget and duration of the eligibility of costs Lack of flexibility to move funds transnationally Tendering rules Complexity in the reporting of the eligible costs to funders We describe why there is a need to support multinational IICS, what should be their objectives and what are the current funding mechanisms in Europe. Strategies for funding multinational IICS should evolve to mitigate identified barriers, thus facilitating research that can provide answers to highly relevant questions in healthcare which are less likely to be answered by studies funded by the pharmaceutical and medical device industry., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: In group-sequential designs, it is typically assumed that there is no time gap between patient enrollment and outcome measurement in clinical trials. However, in practice, there is usually a lag between the two time points. This can affect the statistical analysis of the data, especially in trials with interim analyses. One approach to address delayed responses has been introduced by Hampson and Jennison (J R Stat Soc Ser B Stat Methodol 75:3-54, 2013), who proposed the use of error-spending stopping boundaries for patient enrollment, followed by critical values to reject the null hypothesis if the stopping boundaries are crossed beforehand. Regarding the choice of a trial design, it is important to consider the efficiency of trial designs, e.g. in terms of the probability of trial success (power) and required resources (sample size and time)., Methods: This article aims to shed more light on the performance comparison of group sequential clinical trial designs that account for delayed responses and designs that do not. Suitable performance measures are described and designs are evaluated using the R package rpact. By doing so, we provide insight into global performance measures, discuss the applicability of conditional performance characteristics, and finally whether performance gain justifies the use of complex trial designs that incorporate delayed responses., Results: We investigated how the delayed response group sequential test (DR-GSD) design proposed by Hampson and Jennison (J R Stat Soc Ser B Stat Methodol 75:3-54, 2013) can be extended to include nonbinding lower recruitment stopping boundaries, illustrating that their original design framework can accommodate both binding and nonbinding rules when additional constraints are imposed. Our findings indicate that the performance enhancements from methods incorporating delayed responses heavily rely on the sample size at interim and the volume of data in the pipeline, with overall performance gains being limited., Conclusion: This research extends existing literature on group-sequential designs by offering insights into differences in performance. We conclude that, given the overall marginal differences, discussions regarding appropriate trial designs can pivot towards practical considerations of operational feasibility., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Multidisciplinary discussion (MDD), in which physicians, radiologists, and pathologists communicate and diagnose together, has been reported to improve diagnostic accuracy compared to diagnoses made solely by physicians. However, even among experts, diagnostic concordance of MDD is not always good, and some patients may not receive a specific diagnosis due to insufficient findings. A provisional diagnosis based on the ontology with a diagnostic confidence level has recently been proposed. Additionally, we developed an artificial intelligence model to differentiate idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) from other chronic interstitial lung diseases (ILD)s, which needs validation in a broader population., Methods: This prospective nationwide ILD registry has recruited patients with newly diagnosed ILD at the referral respiratory hospitals in Japan and provides rapid MDD diagnoses and treatment recommendations through a central online MDD platform with a 3-year follow-up period. A modified diagnostic ontology is used. If no diagnosis reaches more than 50% certainty, the diagnosis is unclassifiable ILD. If multiple diseases are expected, the diagnosis with a high probability takes precedence. If the confidence levels for the top two possible diagnoses are equal, the diagnosis can be unclassifiable. The registry uses tentative diagnostic criteria for nonspecific interstitial pneumonia with organising pneumonia and smoking-related ILD not otherwise specified as possible new entities. Central MDD diagnosticians review the clinical data, test results, radiology images, and pathological specimens on a dedicated website and conduct MDD diagnoses using online meetings with a cloud-based reporting system. This study aims to (1) provide MDD diagnoses with treatment recommendations; (2) determine the overall ILD rates in Japan; (3) clarify the reasons for unclassifiable ILDs; (4) evaluate possible new disease entities; (5) identify progressive phenotypes and create a clinical prediction model; (6) measure the agreement rate between institutional and central diagnoses in ILD referral and non-referral centres; (7) identify key factors for each specific ILD diagnosis; and (8) create a new disease classification system based on treatment strategies, including the use of antifibrotic drugs., Discussion: This study will provide ILD frequencies, including new entities, using central MDD on dedicated online systems, and develop a machine learning model for ILD diagnosis and prognosis prediction., Trial Registration: UMIN-CTR Clinical Trial Registry (UMIN000040678)., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Few randomized trials of public health and social measures were carried out during the COVID-19 pandemic. We report on the major barriers we faced when we tried to run such trials., Methods: We reviewed all randomized trials proposed and initiated by the Centre for Epidemic Interventions Research in Norway during the COVID-19 pandemic., Results: Of the 18 proposed trials, 11 trials were not implemented. One of the key legal and ethical barriers to conducting the trials was the Norwegian Health Research Act, which demands informed consent from all participants who are exposed to an intervention. A lack of sufficient political support was also a challenge, as was unpredictability, due to shifting disease incidence and changing recommendations from the authorities., Conclusion: Strengthening the evidence base for public health and social measures in pandemics will require political and public understanding and support and a legal framework that allows for the conduct of such trials., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: When running a randomized controlled trial (RCT), a clinical site may face a situation when an eligible trial participant is to be randomized to the treatment that is not available at the site. In this case, there are two options: not to enroll the participant, or, without disclosing to the site, allocate the participant to a treatment arm with drug available at the site using a built-in feature of the interactive response technology (IRT). In the latter case, one has employed a "forced randomization" (FR). There seems to be an industry-wide consensus that using FR can be acceptable in confirmatory trials provided there are "not too many" instances of forcing. A better understanding of statistical properties of FR is warranted., Methods: We described four different IRT configurations with or without FR and illustrated them using a simple example. We discussed potential merits of FR and outlined some relevant theoretical risks and risk mitigation strategies. We performed a search using Cortellis Regulatory Intelligence database (IDRAC) ( www.cortellis.com ) to understand the prevalence of FR in clinical trial practice. We also proposed a structured template for development and evaluation of randomization designs featuring FR and showcased an application of this template for a hypothetical multi-center 1:1 RCT under three experimental settings ("base case", "slower recruitment", and "faster recruitment") to explore the effect of four different IRT configurations in combination with three different drug supply/re-supply strategies on some important operating characteristics of the trial. We also supplied the Julia code that can be used to reproduce our simulation results and generate additional results under user-specified experimental scenarios., Results: FR can eliminate refusals to randomize patients, which can cause frustration for patients and study site personnel, improve the study logistics, drug supply management, cost-efficiency, and recruitment time. Nevertheless, FR carries some potential risks that should be reviewed at the study planning stage and, ideally, prospectively addressed through risk mitigation planning. The Cortellis search identified only 9 submissions that have reported the use of FR; typically, the FR option was documented in IRT specifications. Our simulation evidence showed that under the considered realistic experimental settings, the percentage of FR is expected to be low. When FR with backfilling was used in combination with high re-supply strategy, the final treatment imbalance was negligibly small, the proportion of patients not randomized due to the lack of drug supply was close to zero, and the time to complete recruitment was shortened compared to the case when FR was not allowed. The drug overage was primarily determined by the intensity of the re-supply strategy and to a smaller extent by the presence or absence of the FR feature in IRT., Conclusion: FR with a carefully chosen drug supply/re-supply strategy can result in quantifiable improvements in the patients' and site personnel experience, trial logistics and efficiency while preventing an undesirable refusal to randomize a patient and a consequential unblinding at the site. FR is a useful design feature of multi-center RCTs provided it is properly planned for and carefully implemented., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Poor patient accrual can delay reporting of clinical trials and, consequently, the development of new treatments. For reducing the risk of additional resource requirements, a method for setting planned accrual periods with minimal deviation from the actual accrual periods is desirable. Risk factors for poor patient accrual and the appropriate method of estimating the required accrual period for timely completion of clinical trials were evaluated using the data of trials conducted by the Japan Clinical Oncology Group., Methods: The study included 199 trials that started patient accrual between January 1, 1990, and June 30, 2021. The explanatory variables included factors that could be evaluated prior to trial commencement. We also evaluated whether the estimation methods for accrual pace could lead to completion within the planned accrual period., Results: Approximately 23.6% of trials were completed within the planned accrual period. The risk factors for trial extension included planned accrual periods > 3 years (reference group: ≤ 3 years, odds ratio [OR] 0.37, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.15-0.92, P = 0.033) and stratified trial design (reference group: nonrandomized phase II trials, nonrandomized phase III trial [OR: 3.28, 95% CI: 0.99-10.9, P = 0.051], randomized phase II trial [OR: 3.91, 95% CI: 0.75-20.30, P = 0.105], and randomized phase III trial [OR: 9.29, 95% CI: 3.39-25.40, P < 0.001]). The method of estimating the accrual pace based on past clinical trials facilitated timely completion of the trial (OR: 3.51; 95% CI: 1.73-7.10, P < 0.001), unlike the estimation method based on survey evaluation of the accrual pace for participating institutions (OR: 1.12, 95% CI: 0.56-2.26, P = 0.751). Furthermore, the discrepancy between planned and actual accrual periods was minimal when using the methods of considering the accrual pace of past clinical trials., Conclusions: Considering the accrual pace of past clinical trials is useful for estimating the required accrual period if data from past trials are available. When conducting a survey, it is necessary to be cautious of overestimating the cases at each facility., (© 2024. The Author(s).)