Suchergebnisse

Many countries around the world are creating COVID-19 trial datasets and databases of COVID-19-related data such as test results that cover entire populations. It is our strong recommendation, and sincere hope, that these data assets will be brought together through record linkage so that their scientific value and impact for society can be amplified. We call on trialists, data stewards and research funders to work together so that prospective linkage of trial data to medical databases becomes the norm, starting with COVID-19 trials.

Background The oversight and conduct of a randomised controlled trial involves several stakeholders, including a Trial Steering Committee (TSC), Trial Management Group (TMG), Data Monitoring Committee (DMC), funder, and sponsor. We aimed to examine how the relationships between these stakeholders affect the trial oversight process and its rigour, to inform future revision of Good Clinical Practice guidelines. Methods Using an ethnographic study design, we observed the oversight processes of eight trials and conducted semi-structured interviews with members of the trials' TSCs and TMGs, plus other relevant informants, including sponsors and funders of trials. Data were analysed thematically, and findings triangulated and integrated to give a multi-perspective account of current oversight practices in the UK. Findings Eight TSC and six TMG meetings from eight trials were observed and audio-recorded, and 66 semi-structured interviews conducted with 52 purposively sampled key informants. Five themes are presented: Collaboration within the TMG and role of the CTU; Collaboration and conflict between oversight committees; Priorities; Communication between trial oversight groups; and Power and accountability. There was evidence of collaborative relationships, based on mutual respect, between CTUs, TMGs and TSCs, but also evidence of conflict. Relationships between trial oversight committees were influenced by stakeholders' priorities, both organisational and individual. Good communication following specific, recognised routes played a central role in ensuring relationships were productive and trial oversight efficient. Participants described the possession of power over trials as a shifting political landscape, and there was lack of clarity regarding the roles and accountability of each committee, the sponsor, and funder. Stakeholders' perceptions of their own power over a trial, and the power of others, influenced relationships between those involved in trial oversight. Conclusions Recent developments in trial design ...

IntroductionResearchers are increasingly using health systems data to support clinical trials. A recent Delphi study identified a number of remaining challenges across the trial lifecycle and highlighted opportunities to address them through the development of training resources.
Objective and ApproachWe present a programme of work to identify, facilitate and optimise emerging practices for using health systems data in trials, informed by subject matter experts and steered by public input, to begin addressing the ongoing challenges for trial teams.
ResultsDirectly addressing a key identified priority for building public trust, we co-developed a series of freely-available online training videos on how public involvement and engagement can impact across the trial lifecycle plus practical tips for such activities. This curriculum was informed by public members who then featured in the training videos. We broadened the training focus to align with trials community needs, whilst retaining the public co-production element. A diverse and purposive group of applicants were selected to contribute to the ongoing work of the HDR UK Transforming Data for Trials workstream. Our presentation reviews how models of involvement have informed our approach including reflections from our public members on what has worked well and what can be improved. We will reflect on the intersection of public involvement in trials and public involvement in healthcare/administrative systems data research.
Conclusions & ImplicationsCo-development with a diverse public group ensures all current and future training resources developed reflect a diversity of views, increasing the quality and credibility of materials.

Background: The oversight and conduct of a randomised controlled trial involves several stakeholders, including a Trial Steering Committee (TSC), Trial Management Group (TMG), Data Monitoring Committee (DMC), funder, and sponsor. We aimed to examine how the relationships between these stakeholders affect the trial oversight process and its rigour, to inform future revision of Good Clinical Practice guidelines. Methods: Using an ethnographic study design, we observed the oversight processes of eight trials and conducted semi-structured interviews with members of the trials' TSCs and TMGs, plus other relevant informants, including sponsors and funders of trials. Data were analysed thematically, and findings triangulated and integrated to give a multi-perspective account of current oversight practices in the UK. Findings Eight TSC and six TMG meetings from eight trials were observed and audio-recorded, and 66 semistructured interviews conducted with 52 purposively sampled key informants. Five themes are presented: Collaboration within the TMG and role of the CTU; Collaboration and conflict between oversight committees; Priorities; Communication between trial oversight groups; and Power and accountability. There was evidence of collaborative relationships, based on mutual respect, between CTUs, TMGs and TSCs, but also evidence of conflict. Relationships between trial oversight committees were influenced by stakeholders' priorities, both organisational and individual. Good communication following specific, recognised routes played a central role in ensuring relationships were productive and trial oversight efficient. Participants described the possession of power over trials as a shifting political landscape, and there was lack of clarity regarding the roles and accountability of each committee, the sponsor, and funder. Stakeholders' perceptions of their own power over a trial, and the power of others, influenced relationships between those involved in trial oversight. Conclusions: Recent developments in trial design and conduct have been accompanied by changes in roles and relationships between trial oversight groups. Recognising and respecting the value of differing priorities among those involved in running trials is key to successful relationships between committees, funders and sponsors. Clarity regarding appropriate lines of communication, roles, and accountability is needed. We present 10 evidence-based recommendations to inform updates to international trial guidance, particularly the Medical Research Council guidelines