Dataset Information

Randomized evaluation of trial acceptability by INcentive (RETAIN): Study protocol for two embedded randomized controlled trials.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:The most common and conceptually sound ethical concerns with financial incentives for research participation are that they may (1) represent undue inducements by blunting peoples' perceptions of research risks, thereby preventing fully informed consent; or (2) represent unjust inducements by encouraging enrollment preferentially among the poor. Neither of these concerns has been shown to manifest in studies testing the effects of incentives on decisions to participate in hypothetical randomized clinical trials (RCTs), but neither has been assessed in real RCTs. METHODS AND ANALYSES:We are conducting randomized trials of real incentives embedded within two parent RCTs. In each of two trials conducted in parallel, we are randomizing 576 participants to one of three incentive groups. Following preliminary determination of patients' eligibility in the parent RCT, we assess patients' research attitudes, demographic characteristics, perceived research risks, time spent reviewing consent documents, ability to distinguish research from patient care, and comprehension of key trial features. These quantitative assessments will be supplemented by semi-structured interviews for a selected group of participants that more deeply explore patients' motivations for trial participation. The trials are each designed to have adequate power to rule out undue and unjust inducement. We are also exploring potential benefits of incentives, including possible increased attention to research risks and cost-effectiveness.

SUBMITTER: Krutsinger DC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6354250 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Randomized evaluation of trial acceptability by INcentive (RETAIN): Study protocol for two embedded randomized controlled trials.

Krutsinger Dustin C DC McMahon Jacqueline J Stephens-Shields Alisa J AJ Bayes Brian B Brooks Steven S Hitsman Brian L BL Lubitz Su Fen SF Reyes Celine C Schnoll Robert A RA Ryan Greysen S S Mercede Ashley A Patel Mitesh S MS Reale Catherine C Barg Fran F Karlawish Jason J Polsky Daniel D Volpp Kevin G KG Halpern Scott D SD

Contemporary clinical trials 20181108

<h4>Introduction</h4>The most common and conceptually sound ethical concerns with financial incentives for research participation are that they may (1) represent undue inducements by blunting peoples' perceptions of research risks, thereby preventing fully informed consent; or (2) represent unjust inducements by encouraging enrollment preferentially among the poor. Neither of these concerns has been shown to manifest in studies testing the effects of incentives on decisions to participate in hyp ...[more]

PMID: 30414865

Similar Datasets

Project description:Trauma resuscitation practices have continued to improve with new advances targeting prehospital interventions. The critical care burden associated with severely injured patients at risk of hemorrhage has been poorly characterized. We aim to describe the individual and additive effects of multiorgan failure (MOF) and nosocomial infection (NI) on delayed mortality and resource utilization. A secondary analysis of harmonized data from two large prehospital randomized controlled trials (Prehospital Air Medical Plasma (PAMPer) Trial and Study of Tranexamic Acid during Air and Ground Medical Prehospital Transport (STAAMP) Trial) was conducted. Only those patients who survived beyond the first 24 hours post-injury and spent at least one day in the ICU were included. Patients were stratified by development of MOF only, NI only, both, or neither and diagnosis of early (≤ 3 days) versus late MOF (> 3 days). Risk factors of NI and MOF, time course of these ICU complications, associated mortality, and hospital resource utilization were evaluated. Of the 869 patients who were enrolled in PAMPer and STAAMP and who met study criteria, 27.4% developed MOF only (n = 238), 10.9% developed NI only (n = 95), and 15.3% were diagnosed with both MOF and NI (n = 133). Patients developing NI and/or MOF compared to those who had an uncomplicated ICU course had greater injury severity, lower GCS, and greater shock indexes. Early MOF occurred in isolation, while late MOF more often followed NI. MOF was associated with 65% higher independent risk of 30-day mortality when adjusting for cofounders (OR 1.65; 95% CI 1.04-2.6; p = 0.03), however NI did not significantly affect odds of mortality. NI was individually associated with longer mechanical ventilation, ICU stay, hospital stay, and rehabilitation requirements, and the addition of MOF further increased the burden of inpatient and post-discharge care. MOF and NI remain common complications for those who survive traumatic injury. MOF is a robust independent predictor of mortality following injury in this cohort, and NI is associated with higher resource utilization. Timing of these ICU complications may reveal differences in pathophysiology and offer targets for continued advancements in treatment.

Project description:BackgroundAudit and feedback (A&F) that shows how health professionals compare to those of their peers, can be an effective intervention to reduce unnecessary antibiotic prescribing among family physicians. However, the most impactful design approach to A&F to achieve this aim is uncertain. We will test three design modifications of antibiotic A&F that could be readily scaled and sustained if shown to be effective: (1) inclusion of case-mix-adjusted peer comparator versus a crude comparator, (2) emphasizing harms, rather than lack of benefits, and (3) providing a viral prescription pad.MethodsWe will conduct two interrelated pragmatic randomized trials in January 2021. One trial will include family physicians in Ontario who have signed up to receive their MyPractice: Primary Care report from Ontario Health ("OH Trial"). These physicians will be cluster-randomized by practice, 1:1 to intervention or control. The intervention group will also receive a Viral Prescription Pad mailed to their office as well as added emphasis in their report on use of the pad. Ontario family physicians who have not signed up to receive their MyPractice: Primary Care report will be included in the other trial administered by Public Health Ontario ("PHO Trial"). These physicians will be allocated 4:1 to intervention or control. The intervention group will be further randomized by two factors: case-mix adjusted versus unadjusted comparator and emphasis or not on harms of antibiotics. Physicians in the intervention arm of this trial will receive one of four versions of a personalized antibiotic A&F letter from PHO. For both trials, the primary outcome is the antibiotic prescribing rate per 1000 patient visits, measured at 6 months post-randomization, the primary analysis will use Poisson regression and we will follow the intention to treat principle. A mixed-methods process evaluation will use surveys and interviews with family physicians to explore potential mechanisms underlying the observed effects, exploring targeted constructs including intention, self-efficacy, outcome expectancies, descriptive norms, and goal prioritization.DiscussionThis protocol describes the rationale and methodology of two interrelated pragmatic trials testing variations of theory-informed components of an audit and feedback intervention to determine how to optimize A&F interventions for antibiotic prescribing in primary care.Trial registrationNCT04594200, NCT05044052. CIHR Grant ID: 398514.

Project description:Several studies have shown that lisdexamfetamine (LDX) is efficacious in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).Aims of this study were to systematically review the efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability of LDX in child and adolescent ADHD. Any randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of LDX versus placebo carried out in children and adolescents with ADHD were included.The searches of the SCOPUS, MEDLINE, CINAHL and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were performed in September 2014. Additional searches in the ClinicalTrials. gov and EU Clinical Trials Register database were conducted.This review included all RCTs of LDX versus placebo which were carried out in children and adolescents up to 18 years old. Additionally, the included studies must have reported the final outcomes of: i) severity of ADHD symptoms with standardized scales, ii) rates of improvement, iii) rates of discontinuation. To be more thorough, the languages of such RCTs were not limited.The abstracts from databases were inspected and the full text versions of relevant trials were examined and extracted for important outcomes. The efficacious measurements included either the pooled mean end-point or changed scores of ADHD rating scales, and the rate of improvement. Acceptability and tolerability were measured by the pooled overall discontinuation rate and the pooled discontinuation rate due to adverse events, respectively. A random effect model technique was utilized to synthesize the mean differences (either standardized mean differences or weighted mean differences) and relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).A total of 1,016 children and adolescents with ADHD were included. The dosage of LDX was 30 to 70 mg/day. The pooled mean change scores of LDX-treated group was significantly greater than that of the placebo (weighted mean difference [95% CI] of -15.20 [-19.95, -10.46], I (2)=94%). The pooled improvement rate of the LDX-treated group was also significantly higher than that of the placebo (RR [95% CI] of 0.34 [0.24, 0.47], I (2)=80%). The pooled overall discontinuation rate between the two groups was not significantly different (RR [95% CI] of 0.78 [0.46, 1.31], I (2)=63%). Similarly, the pooled discontinuation rate due to adverse events between the two groups showed no significant difference (RR [95% CI] of 1.99 [0.70, 5.64], I (2)=0%).The number of included studies was limited (five RCTs).According to the present review, LDX was effective and well-tolerated in the treatment of child and adolescent ADHD. Unfortunately, the acceptability of LDX was not better than the placebo. Since the number of included studies was limited, the outcome from this review should be carefully interpreted and considered as preliminary. Further studies, therefore, should be conducted to confirm these findings.Lisdexamfetamine is an efficacious stimulant for treating child and adolescent ADHD.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:This manuscript (1) outlines the intervention, (2) describes how its effectiveness is being evaluated in a pragmatic randomized controlled trial, and (3) summarizes the embedded process evaluation aiming to understand key barriers and facilitators for implementation in new environments. METHODS:Participating centers refer eligible individuals with COPD following discharge from their local PR program. Consenting patients are assigned to a year-long community exercise program or usual care using block randomization and stratifying for supplemental oxygen use. Patients in the intervention arm are asked to attend an exercise session at least twice per week at their local community facility where their progress is supervised by a case manager. Each exercise session includes a component of aerobic exercise, and activities designed to optimize balance, flexibility, and strength. All study participants will have access to routine follow-up appointments with their respiratory physician, and additional health care providers as part of their usual care. Assessments will be completed at baseline (post-PR), 6, and 12 months, and include measures of functional exercise capacity, quality of life, self-efficacy, and health care usage. Intervention effectiveness will be assessed by comparing functional exercise capacity between intervention and control groups. A mixed-methods process evaluation will be conducted to better understand intervention implementation, guided by Normalization Process Theory and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. RESULTS:Based on results from our pilot work, we anticipate a maintenance of exercise capacity and improved health-related quality of life in the intervention group, compared with a decline in exercise capacity in the usual care group. DISCUSSION:Findings from this study will improve our understanding of the effectiveness of community-based exercise programs for maintaining benefits following PR in patients with COPD and provide information on how best to implement them. If effective, the intervention represents an opportunity to transition patients from institutionally-based rehabilitative management to community-based care. The results of the process evaluation will contribute to the science of translating evidence-based programs into regular practice.

Project description:BackgroundAbout 50% of university students overconsume alcohol, and drinking habits in later adulthood are to some extent established during higher educational studies. Several studies have demonstrated that Internet-based interventions have positive effects on drinking habits among university students. Our recent study evaluated two mobile phone apps targeting drinking choices at party occasions via personalized feedback on estimated blood alcohol concentration (eBAC) for students with hazardous drinking. No changes in drinking parameters were found over a seven-week period apart from an increase in number of drinking occasions among men for one of the apps tested. Up to 30% of the study participants drank at potentially harmful levels: higher than the national recommended number of standard drinks per week (a maximum of 9 for women and 14 for men) in Sweden.Objective(1) To evaluate improved versions of the two mobile phone apps tested in our prior trial, in a new, 3-armed randomized controlled trial among university students with at least hazardous drinking habits according to the Alcohol Use Disorders Identifications Test (AUDIT; Study 1). (2) After 6 weeks, to target study participants showing alcohol consumption higher than the national recommended levels for standard drinks per week by offering them participation in a second, 2-armed randomized trial evaluating an additional mobile phone app with skill enhancement tasks (Study 2). (3) To follow participants at 6, 12 and 18 weeks after recruitment to Study 1 and at 6 and 12 weeks after recruitment to Study 2.MethodsTwo randomized controlled trials are conducted. Study 1: Students are recruited at four Swedish universities, via direct e-mail and advertisements on Facebook and student union web sites. Those who provide informed consent, have a mobile phone, and show at least hazardous alcohol consumption according to the AUDIT (≥6 for women; ≥8 points for men) are randomized into three groups. Group 1 has access to the Swedish government alcohol monopoly's app, Promillekoll, offering real-time estimated eBAC calculation; Group 2 has access to a Web-based app, PartyPlanner, developed by the research group, offering real-time eBAC calculation with planning and follow-up functions; and Group 3 participants are controls. Follow-up is conducted at 6, 12 and 18 weeks. Study 2. Participants who at the first 6-week follow-up show drinking levels higher than 9 (W) or 14 (M) standard drinks (12 g alcohol) per week, are offered participation in Study 2. Those who consent are randomized to either access to a skills training app, TeleCoach or to a wait-list control group.ResultsLatent Markov models for Study 1 and mixed models analyses for Study 2 will be performed. Study 2 data will be analyzed for publication during the spring of 2016; Study 1 data will be analyzed for publication during the fall of 2016.ConclusionsIf mobile phone interventions for reducing hazardous alcohol use are found to be effective, the prospects for positively influencing substance use-related health among university students can considerably improve.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02064998 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6dy0AlVRP).

Project description:Objective: This study assessed the efficacy, acceptability, and safety of pharmaceutical management for combat-related post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) to provide a clinical decision-making basis for clinicians. Method: A comprehensive search was conducted using Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trails (RCTs), which reported pharmaceutical management and placobo for adults with combat-related PTSD, that were published until April 21, 2021. The effectiveness, acceptability, and adverse events (AEs), were designed as interested outcomes. The change in total symptoms of combat-related PTSD according to the clinician rating scale was defined as primary outcome, and the others were defined as secondary outcomes. Results: Twenty-two RCTs with 1,221 patients were involved. Compared with placebo, overall active comparators had statistical differences for all outcomes, including the change in total symptoms of combat-related PTSD [SMD = -0.36, 95%CI (-0.62,-0.09)], depression [SMD = -0.28, 95%CI (-0.45,-0.10)], anxiety [SMD = -0.44, 95%CI (-0.64,-0.23)], re-experience [SMD = -0.33, 95%CI (-0.52,-0.13)], avoidance [SMD = -0.24, 95%CI (-0.43,-0.05)], and hyper-arousal [SMD = -0.26, 95%CI (-0.48,-0.03)]. Compared with the placebo, in terms of acceptability, overall active comparators did not significantly decrease all-cause discontinuance rates [RR = 0.97, 95%CI (0.78,1.20)], and the significance decreased due to AEs [RR = 2.42, 95%CI (1.41,4.13)]. Nevertheless, overall there was no statistically significant difference for overall AEs, including somnolence, sedation, dizziness, paresthesia, anxiety, blurred vision, generalized anxiety disorder, and sleep disturbance. All funnel plots were symmetrical and no publication bias was found. Conclusion: Active drugs, especially amitriptyline, imipramine, and quetiapine, had a positive effect on the improvement of combat-related PTSD symptoms. Despite there being no significant increase in the AEs of the active drugs, the fact that the discontinuation rates of these drugs, including risperidone, imipramine, and topiramate, were increased deserves attention. Furthermore, as active drugs were effective across ethnic groups and battlefields, active drug regimens were revealed to be more appropriate for treating people with symptoms of extreme severe PTSD (≥80) or PTSD that is at least 8 weeks old. In addition, current evidence was from adults under 60 years of age and male combat-related PTSD. Whether this evidence can be extended to other populations of combat-related PTSD needs to be confirmed by subsequent high-quality, large-sample studies.

Dataset Information

Randomized evaluation of trial acceptability by INcentive (RETAIN): Study protocol for two embedded randomized controlled trials.

Publications

Randomized evaluation of trial acceptability by INcentive (RETAIN): Study protocol for two embedded randomized controlled trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets