首页> 外文OA文献 >Missing steps in a staircase: a qualitative study of the perspectives of key stakeholders on the use of adaptive designs in confirmatory trials
【2h】

Missing steps in a staircase: a qualitative study of the perspectives of key stakeholders on the use of adaptive designs in confirmatory trials

机译:阶梯上缺少的步骤:定性研究主要利益相关者在验证性试验中使用自适应设计的观点

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

BackgroundududDespite the promising benefits of adaptive designs (ADs), their routine use, especially in confirmatory trials, is lagging behind the prominence given to them in the statistical literature. Much of the previous research to understand barriers and potential facilitators to the use of ADs has been driven from a pharmaceutical drug development perspective, with little focus on trials in the public sector. In this paper, we explore key stakeholders’ experiences, perceptions and views on barriers and facilitators to the use of ADs in publicly funded confirmatory trials. ududMethodsududSemi-structured, in-depth interviews of key stakeholders in clinical trials research (CTU directors, funding board and panel members, statisticians, regulators, chief investigators, data monitoring committee members and health economists) were conducted through telephone or face-to-face sessions, predominantly in the UK. We purposively selected participants sequentially to optimise maximum variation in views and experiences. We employed the framework approach to analyse the qualitative data. ududResultsududWe interviewed 27 participants. We found some of the perceived barriers to be: lack of knowledge and experience coupled with paucity of case studies, lack of applied training, degree of reluctance to use ADs, lack of bridge funding and time to support design work, lack of statistical expertise, some anxiety about the impact of early trial stopping on researchers’ employment contracts, lack of understanding of acceptable scope of ADs and when ADs are appropriate, and statistical and practical complexities. Reluctance to use ADs seemed to be influenced by: therapeutic area, unfamiliarity, concerns about their robustness in decision-making and acceptability of findings to change practice, perceived complexities and proposed type of AD, among others. ududConclusionsududThere are still considerable multifaceted, individual and organisational obstacles to be addressed to improve uptake, and successful implementation of ADs when appropriate. Nevertheless, inferred positive change in attitudes and receptiveness towards the appropriate use of ADs by public funders are supportive and are a stepping stone for the future utilisation of ADs by researchers.
机译:背景 ud ud尽管自适应设计(AD)具有令人鼓舞的好处,但它们的常规使用(尤其是在验证性试验中)仍落后于统计文献中对它们的关注。先前的许多研究旨在了解使用AD的障碍和潜在的促进因素,这是从药物开发的角度出发的,很少关注公共部门的试验。在本文中,我们探讨了关键利益相关者在公共资助的验证试验中使用AD的障碍和促进者的经验,看法和观点。 ud udMethods ud ud对临床试验研究的主要利益相关者(CTU主任,资金董事会和小组成员,统计学家,监管机构,首席研究人员,数据监测委员会成员和卫生经济学家)进行了半结构化的深入访谈电话或面对面会议,主要在英国。我们有针对性地选择参与者以优化观点和体验的最大差异。我们采用框架方法来分析定性数据。 ud udResults ud ud我们采访了27位参与者。我们发现一些可能的障碍是:缺乏知识和经验,加上缺乏案例研究,缺乏应用培训,不愿使用AD的程度,缺乏过渡资金和时间来支持设计工作,缺乏统计专业知识,对于提前停止试验对研究人员的就业合同的影响,缺乏对可接受的AD范围以及何时使用AD的理解以及统计和实践的复杂性,存在一些焦虑。不愿使用AD似乎受到以下方面的影响:治疗领域,不熟悉,对其决策的鲁棒性和对变更实践的发现的接受程度,感知的复杂性和AD的提议类型等方面的担忧。 ud ud结论 ud ud在适当的情况下,仍然存在相当多方面的,个人和组织上的障碍需要解决,以提高吸收率并成功实施AD。然而,推断出公共资助者对适当使用AD的态度和接受性的积极变化是支持的,并且是研究人员未来使用AD的垫脚石。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号