首页> 外文OA文献 >Randomised trials comparing different healthcare settings : an exploratory review of the impact of pre-trial preferences on participation, and discussion of other methodological challenges
【2h】

Randomised trials comparing different healthcare settings : an exploratory review of the impact of pre-trial preferences on participation, and discussion of other methodological challenges

机译:比较不同医疗环境的随机试验:对试验前偏好对参与的影响的探索性回顾,以及对其他方法学挑战的讨论

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

BACKGROUND: We recently published a systematic review of different healthcare settings (such as outpatient, community or home) for administering intravenous chemotherapy, and concluded that performing conventionally designed randomised trials was difficult. The main problems were achieving adequate trial accrual rates and recruiting a study population which adequately represented the target population of interest. These issues stemmed from the fact that potential participants may have had pre-trial perceptions about the trial settings they may be allocated; such preferences will sometimes be strong enough for patients to decline an invitation to participate in a trial. A patient preference trial design (in which patients can choose, or be randomised to, an intervention) may have obviated these recruitment issues, although none of the trials used such a design. METHODS: In order to gain a better understanding of the broader prevalence and extent of these preference issues (and any other methodological challenges), we undertook an exploratory review of settings trials in any area of healthcare treatment research. We searched The Cochrane Library and Google Scholar and used snowballing methods to identify trials comparing different healthcare settings. RESULTS: Trial accrual was affected by patient preferences for a setting in 15 of the 16 identified studies; birth setting trials were the most markedly affected, with between 68 % and 85 % of eligible women declining to participate specifically because of preference for a particular healthcare setting. Recruitment into substance abuse and chemotherapy setting studies was also notably affected by preferences. Only four trials used a preference design: the proportion of eligible patients choosing to participate via a preference group ranged from between 33 % and 67 %. CONCLUSIONS: In trials of healthcare settings, accrual may be seriously affected by patient preferences. The use of trial designs which incorporate a preference component should therefore strongly be considered. When designing such trials, investigators should consider settings to be complex interventions, which are likely to have linked components which may be difficult to control for. Careful thought is also needed regarding the choice of comparator settings and the most appropriate outcome measures to be used.
机译:背景:我们最近发表了对不同医疗机构(例如门诊,社区或家庭)进行静脉化疗的系统评价,并得出结论,进行常规设计的随机试验很困难。主要问题是要获得足够的试验应计率,并招募足以代表目标目标人群的研究人群。这些问题源于一个事实,即潜在的参与者可能对他们可能分配的审判环境有预审认识。这样的偏好有时会足够强烈,以至于患者拒绝邀请参加试验。尽管没有一个试验使用这样的设计,但是患者偏好的试验设计(患者可以选择或随机选择一种干预措施)可能已经消除了这些招募问题。方法:为了更好地了解这些偏好问题的广泛流行和程度(以及其他方法挑战),我们对医疗保健研究任何领域的环境试验进行了探索性审查。我们搜索了Cochrane图书馆和Google Scholar,并使用滚雪球方法来确定比较不同医疗保健条件的试验。结果:在16项已确定研究中的15项研究中,患者的喜好影响了应计试算。生育环境试验受到的影响最为明显,有68%至85%的合格妇女由于对特定医疗机构的偏爱而拒绝参加。药物滥用和化疗设置研究的招募也受到偏好的显着影响。只有四项试验使用偏好设计:通过偏好组选择参加的合格患者比例在33%至67%之间。结论:在医疗机构的试验中,应计可能会受到患者偏好的严重影响。因此,应该强烈考虑使用包含优先选项的试验设计。在设计此类试验时,研究人员应将设置视为复杂的干预措施,这些干预措施可能具有可能难以控制的关联组件。关于比较器设置的选择和要使用的最适当的结果度量,也需要仔细考虑。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
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