Dataset Information

Evaluating the risks of clinical research: direct comparative analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

Many guidelines and regulations allow children and adolescents to be enrolled in research without the prospect of clinical benefit when it poses minimal risk. However, few systematic methods exist to determine when research risks are minimal. This situation has led to significant variation in minimal risk judgments, raising concern that some children are not being adequately protected. To address this concern, we describe a new method for implementing the widely endorsed "risks of daily life" standard for minimal risk. This standard defines research risks as minimal when they do not exceed the risks posed by daily life activities or routine examinations.

Methods

This study employed a conceptual and normative analysis, and use of an illustrative example.

Results

Different risks are composed of the same basic elements: Type, likelihood, and magnitude of harm. Hence, one can compare the risks of research and the risks of daily life by comparing the respective basic elements with each other. We use this insight to develop a systematic method, direct comparative analysis, for implementing the "risks of daily life" standard for minimal risk. The method offers a way of evaluating research procedures that pose the same types of risk as daily life activities, such as the risk of experiencing anxiety, stress, or other psychological harm. We thus illustrate how direct comparative analysis can be applied in practice by using it to evaluate whether the anxiety induced by a respiratory CO2 challenge poses minimal or greater than minimal risks in children and adolescents.

Conclusions

Direct comparative analysis is a systematic method for applying the "risks of daily life" standard for minimal risk to research procedures that pose the same types of risk as daily life activities. It thereby offers a method to protect children and adolescents in research, while ensuring that important studies are not blocked because of unwarranted concerns about research risks.

SUBMITTER: Rid A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4162436 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluating the risks of clinical research: direct comparative analysis.

Rid Annette A Abdoler Emily E Roberson-Nay Roxann R Pine Daniel S DS Wendler David D

Journal of child and adolescent psychopharmacology 20140901 7

<h4>Objectives</h4>Many guidelines and regulations allow children and adolescents to be enrolled in research without the prospect of clinical benefit when it poses minimal risk. However, few systematic methods exist to determine when research risks are minimal. This situation has led to significant variation in minimal risk judgments, raising concern that some children are not being adequately protected. To address this concern, we describe a new method for implementing the widely endorsed "risk ...[more]

PMID: 25210944

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRecruitment into clinical trials is a challenging process, with as many as 40% of studies failing to meet their target sample sizes. The principles of direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising rely upon novel marketing strategies. The ability to reach expansive audiences in the web-based realm presents a unique opportunity for researchers to overcome various barriers to enrollment in clinical trials. Research has investigated the use of individual web-based platforms to aid in recruitment and accrual into trials; however, a gap in the literature exists, whereby multiple mass communication platforms have yet to be investigated across a range of clinical trials.ObjectiveThere is a need to better understand how individual factors combine to collectively influence trial recruitment. We aimed to test whether DTC recruitment of potentially eligible study participants via social media platforms (eg, Facebook [Meta Platforms Inc] and Twitter [Twitter Inc]) was an effective strategy or whether this acted as an enhancement to traditional (eg, email via contact registries) recruitment strategies through established clinical research sites.MethodsThis study tested multiple DTC web-based recruitment efforts (Facebook, Twitter, email, and patient advocacy group [PAG] involvement) across 6 national and international research studies from 5 rare disease consortia. Targeted social media messaging, social media management software, and individual study websites with prescreening questions were used in the Protocol for Increasing Accrual Using Social Media (PRISM).ResultsIn total, 1465 PRISM website referrals occurred across all 6 studies. Organic (unpaid) Facebook posts (676/1465, 46.14%) and Rare Diseases Clinical Research Network patient contact registry emails (461/1465, 31.47%) represented the most successful forms of engagement. PRISM was successful in accumulating a 40.1% (136/339) lead generation (those who screened positive and consented to share their contact information to be contacted by a clinical site coordinator). Despite the large number of leads generated from PRISM recruitment efforts, the number of patients who were subsequently enrolled in studies was low. Across 6 studies, 3 participants were ultimately enrolled, meaning that 97.8% (133/136) of leads dropped off.ConclusionsThe results indicate that although accrual results were low, this is consistent with previously documented challenges of studying populations with rare diseases. Targeted messaging integrated throughout the recruitment process (eg, referral, lead, and accrual) remains an area for further research. Key elements to consider include structuring the communicative workflow in such a way that PAG involvement is central to the process, with clinical site coordinators actively involved after an individual consents to share their contact information. Customized approaches are needed for each population and research study, with observational studies best suited for social media recruitment. As evidenced by lead generation, results suggest that web-based recruitment efforts, coupled with targeted messaging and PAG partnerships, have the potential to supplement clinical trial accrual.

Project description:BackgroundVariable selection for regression models plays a key role in the analysis of biomedical data. However, inference after selection is not covered by classical statistical frequentist theory, which assumes a fixed set of covariates in the model. This leads to over-optimistic selection and replicability issues.MethodsWe compared proposals for selective inference targeting the submodel parameters of the Lasso and its extension, the adaptive Lasso: sample splitting, selective inference conditional on the Lasso selection (SI), and universally valid post-selection inference (PoSI). We studied the properties of the proposed selective confidence intervals available via R software packages using a neutral simulation study inspired by real data commonly seen in biomedical studies. Furthermore, we present an exemplary application of these methods to a publicly available dataset to discuss their practical usability.ResultsFrequentist properties of selective confidence intervals by the SI method were generally acceptable, but the claimed selective coverage levels were not attained in all scenarios, in particular with the adaptive Lasso. The actual coverage of the extremely conservative PoSI method exceeded the nominal levels, and this method also required the greatest computational effort. Sample splitting achieved acceptable actual selective coverage levels, but the method is inefficient and leads to less accurate point estimates. The choice of inference method had a large impact on the resulting interval estimates, thereby necessitating that the user is acutely aware of the goal of inference in order to interpret and communicate the results.ConclusionsDespite violating nominal coverage levels in some scenarios, selective inference conditional on the Lasso selection is our recommended approach for most cases. If simplicity is strongly favoured over efficiency, then sample splitting is an alternative. If only few predictors undergo variable selection (i.e. up to 5) or the avoidance of false positive claims of significance is a concern, then the conservative approach of PoSI may be useful. For the adaptive Lasso, SI should be avoided and only PoSI and sample splitting are recommended. In summary, we find selective inference useful to assess the uncertainties in the importance of individual selected predictors for future applications.

Project description:Unraveling the functional dynamics of phosphorylation networks is a crucial step in understanding the way in which biological networks form a living cell. Recently there has been an enormous increase in the number of measured phosphorylation events. Nevertheless, comparative and integrative analysis of phosphoproteomes is confounded by incomplete coverage and biases introduced by different experimental workflows. As a result, we cannot differentiate whether phosphosites indentified in only one or two samples are the result of condition or species specific phosphorylation, or reflect missing data. Here, we evaluate the impact of incomplete phosphoproteomics datasets on comparative analysis, and we present bioinformatics strategies to quantify the impact of different experimental workflows on measured phosphoproteomes. We show that plotting the saturation in observed phosphosites in replicates provides a reproducible picture of the extent of a particular phosphoproteome. Still, we are still far away from a complete picture of the total human phosphoproteome. The impact of different experimental techniques on the similarity between phosphoproteomes can be estimated by comparing datasets from different experimental pipelines to a common reference. Our results show that comparative analysis is most powerful when datasets have been generated using the same experimental workflow. We show this experimentally by measuring the tyrosine phosphoproteome from Caenorhabditis elegans and comparing it to the tyrosine phosphoproteome of HeLa cells, resulting in an overlap of about 4%. This overlap between very different organisms represents a three-fold increase when compared to dataset of older studies, wherein different workflows were used. The strategies we suggest enable an estimation of the impact of differences in experimental workflows on the overlap between datasets. This will allow us to perform comparative analyses not only on datasets specifically generated for this purpose, but also to extract insights through comparative analysis of the ever-increasing wealth of publically available phosphorylation data.

Project description:Comparative effectiveness research (CER) calls for substantial changes in the way clinical research is conducted, interpreted and practically applied in the USA, in order to produce useful clinical evidence. Departing from classic efficacy and effectiveness research, the evolving CER paradigm requires structural and substantive innovations that address three basic questions: what works? for whom? and in whose hands? Addressing these questions will require fundamental changes in the approach to clinical research that include: the use of active treatments (or comparators) versus placebos in the comparisons of treatments, innovative or 'alternative' research methods, the specification and a priori design of studies to account for important subgroups, accounting for the nested nature of healthcare delivery in design and analysis of CER, the simultaneous study of multiple treatments or treatment modalities, the study of multiple outcomes (benefits and harms) for each treatment compared, and the reassessment of the value of different study designs in the hierarchy of collective 'evidence'. In order to aid individual providers and patients in making informed, personalized treatment decisions, guided by the best evidence possible, CER studies must generalize to a broad range of subgroups reflecting the spectrum of patients, providers and health systems that populate real-world practice settings. Without expansion in the scope, conduct and subsequent interpretation of clinical research reflected in the issues outlined above, CER will fall short of its potential for informing evidence-based practice and personalized medicine. The current paradigm for conducting, interpreting and applying clinical research does not meet the needs of optimal generalizability and application to individual physician-patient efforts to identify the most effective treatment, and therefore does not support the basic requirements of CER. The proposed changes should neither require decades nor exorbitant budgets to achieve. Using two examples, prostate cancer, and comparisons of single medications, we illustrated how the proposed changes in clinical research, matching strategy to each application, might be addressed.

Dataset Information

Evaluating the risks of clinical research: direct comparative analysis.

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Evaluating the risks of clinical research: direct comparative analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets