Dataset Information

Perceived barriers to pediatrician and family practitioner participation in pediatric clinical trials: Findings from the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative.

ABSTRACT: Despite legislation to stimulate pediatric drug development through clinical trials, enrolling children in trials continues to be challenging. Non-investigator (those who have never served as a clinical trial investigator) providers are essential to recruitment of pediatric patients, but little is known regarding the specific barriers that limit pediatric providers from participating in and referring their patients to clinical trials. We conducted an online survey of pediatric providers from a wide variety of practice types across the United States to evaluate their attitudes and awareness of pediatric clinical trials. Using a 4-point Likert scale, providers described their perception of potential barriers to their practice serving as a site for pediatric clinical trials. Of the 136 providers surveyed, 52/136 (38%) had previously referred a pediatric patient to a trial, and only 17/136 (12%) had ever been an investigator for a pediatric trial. Lack of awareness of existing pediatric trials was a major barrier to patient referral by providers, in addition to consideration of trial risks, distance to the site, and time needed to discuss trial participation with parents. Overall, providers perceived greater challenges related to parental concerns and parent or child logistical barriers than study implementation and ethics or regulatory barriers as barriers to their practice serving as a trial site. Providers who had previously been an investigator for a pediatric trial were less likely to be concerned with potential barriers than non-investigators. Understanding the barriers that limit pediatric providers from collaboration or inhibit their participation is key to designing effective interventions to optimize pediatric trial participation.

SUBMITTER: Greenberg RG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5898553 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Perceived barriers to pediatrician and family practitioner participation in pediatric clinical trials: Findings from the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative.

Greenberg Rachel G RG Corneli Amy A Bradley John J Farley John J Jafri Hasan S HS Lin Li L Nambiar Sumathi S Noel Gary J GJ Wheeler Chris C Tiernan Rosemary R Smith P Brian PB Roberts Jamie J Benjamin Daniel K DK

Contemporary clinical trials communications 20171126

Despite legislation to stimulate pediatric drug development through clinical trials, enrolling children in trials continues to be challenging. Non-investigator (those who have never served as a clinical trial investigator) providers are essential to recruitment of pediatric patients, but little is known regarding the specific barriers that limit pediatric providers from participating in and referring their patients to clinical trials. We conducted an online survey of pediatric providers from a w ...[more]

PMID: 29696219

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background/aims Use of data monitoring committees to oversee clinical trials was first proposed nearly 50 years ago. Since then, data monitoring committee use in clinical trials has increased and evolved. Nonetheless, there are no well-defined criteria for determining the need for a data monitoring committee, and considerable variability exists in data monitoring committee composition and conduct. To understand and describe the role and function of data monitoring committees, and establish best practices for data monitoring committee trial oversight, the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative-a public-private partnership to improve clinical trials-launched a multi-stakeholder project. Methods The data monitoring committee project team included 16 individuals charged with (1) clarifying the purpose of data monitoring committees, (2) identifying best practices for independent data monitoring committee conduct, (3) describing effective communication practices, and (4) developing strategies for training data monitoring committee members. Evidence gathering included a survey, a series of focus group discussions, and a 2-day expert meeting aimed at achieving consensus opinions that form the foundation of our data monitoring committee recommendations. Results We define the role of the data monitoring committee as an advisor to the research sponsor on whether to continue, modify, or terminate a trial based on periodic assessment of trial data. Data monitoring committees should remain independent from the sponsor and be composed of members with no relevant conflicts of interest. Representation on a data monitoring committee generally should include at least one clinician with expertise in the therapeutic area being studied, a biostatistician, and a designated chairperson who has experience with clinical trials and data monitoring. Data monitoring committee meetings are held periodically to evaluate the unmasked data from ongoing trials, but the content and conduct of meetings may vary depending on specific goals or topics for deliberation. To guide data monitoring committee conduct and communication plans, a charter consistent with the protocol's research design and statistical analysis plan should be developed and agreed upon by the sponsor and the data monitoring committee prior to patient enrollment. We recommend concise and flexible charters that explain roles, responsibilities, operational issues, and how data monitoring committee recommendations are generated and communicated. The demand for data monitoring committee members appears to exceed the current pool of qualified individuals. To prepare a new generation of trained data monitoring committee members, we encourage a combination of didactic educational programs, practical experience, and skill development through apprenticeships and mentoring by experienced data monitoring committee members. Conclusion Our recommendations address data monitoring committee use, conduct, communication practices, and member preparation and training. Furthermore recommendations form the foundation for ongoing efforts to improve clinical trial oversight and enhance the safety and integrity of clinical research. These recommendations serve as a call to action for implementation of best practices that benefit study participants, study sponsors, and society.

Project description:BackgroundIn November 2016, the ICH published a requirement for sponsors to develop a systematic, prioritised, risk-based approach to monitoring clinical trials. This approach is more commonly known as risk-based monitoring (RBM). However, recent evidence suggests that a 'gold standard', validated approach to RBM does not exist and it is unclear how sponsors will introduce RBM into their organisations. A first step needed to inform the implementation of RBM is to explore academic trialists' readiness and ability to perform RBM. The aim of this paper is to identify the attitudes and perceived barriers and facilitators to the implementation of RBM in academic-led clinical trials in Ireland.MethodsThis is a mixed-methods, explanatory sequential design, with quantitative survey followed by semistructured interviews. Academic clinical researchers (N = 132) working in Ireland were surveyed to examine their use and perceptions of RBM. A purposive sample of survey participants (n = 22) were then interviewed to gain greater insight into the quantitative findings. The survey and interview data were merged to generate a list of perceived barriers and facilitators to RBM implementation, with suggestions for, and solutions to, these issues.ResultsSurvey response rate was 49% (132/273). Thirteen percent (n = 18) of responders were not familiar with the term risk-based monitoring and less than a quarter of respondents (21%, n = 28) had performed RBM in a clinical trial. Barriers to RBM implementation included lack of RBM knowledge/training, increased costs caused by greater IT demands, increased workload for trial staff and lack of evidence to support RBM as an effective monitoring approach. Facilitators included participants' legal obligation to perform RBM under the new ICH-GCP guidelines, availability of RBM guidance and perception of cost savings by performing RBM in future trials.ConclusionThe results of this study demonstrate a need for training and regulatory-endorsed guidelines to support the implementation of RBM in academic-led clinical trials. The study provides valuable insights to inform interventions and strategies by policy-makers and clinical trial regulators to improve RBM uptake.

Project description:BackgroundIllicit drug use (DU) and hazardous drinking (HD) among marginalized populations may be associated with greater barriers to care.MethodsWe used baseline data on the participants of the Seek, Test, Treat, and Retain data harmonization initiative. DU includes use of any illicit drugs within the past 6 months. HD was defined as scores ≥8 for men and ≥ 7 for women on Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test within the past 12 months. Social support scores were assigned by summing scores from individual questions related to social support. Two outcomes for multivariable regression models and mediation analysis were perceived access to care and perceived barriers to care scores, calculated from summated points from individual questions within each domain. All models were adjusted for age, gender, race/ethnicity, and social support and stratified by HIV status.ResultsAmong 1403 illicit drug users and 4984 non-drug users, the mean age was 39.6 ± 12.2 years old, 71% were male, 57% African Americans, and 39% Hispanic/Latinos. Over 25% reported difficulties in covering medical costs and finding transportation to health care facilities and greater proportions of drug users and hazardous drinkers reported these issues than non-DU/non-HD. In multivariable models, DU and HD were both independently associated with having greater barriers to care (β: 0.49 (95% confidence interval: 0.19 to 0.79) p < 0.01; 0.31 (0.18 to 0.45) < 0.01) in HIV-negative participants. Neither DU nor HD was strongly associated with barriers to care for HIV-positive participants. Social support was associated with better perceived access to care and fewer barriers to care in the HIV-negative participants.ConclusionThe current study found that financial burdens of care, logistical difficulties in accessing care, and low social support were common challenges among individuals using illicit drugs and/or drinking hazardously. Addressing structural barriers and strengthening social support may be important strategies to improve health care among marginalized populations, regardless of HIV status.

Dataset Information

Perceived barriers to pediatrician and family practitioner participation in pediatric clinical trials: Findings from the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative.

Publications

Perceived barriers to pediatrician and family practitioner participation in pediatric clinical trials: Findings from the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets