Scoping review and characteristics of publicly available checklists for assessing clinical trial feasibility

被引:5
|
作者
Gloy, Viktoria [1 ,2 ]
Speich, Benjamin [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Griessbach, Alexandra [1 ,2 ,4 ]
Taji Heravi, Ala [1 ,2 ,5 ]
Schulz, Alexandra [6 ]
Fabbro, Thomas [6 ]
Magnus, Christiane Pauli [6 ]
McLennan, Stuart [7 ]
Bertram, Wendy [8 ]
Briel, Matthias [1 ,2 ,9 ]
机构
[1] Univ Basel, Dept Clin Res, Basel Inst Clin Epidemiol & Biostat, Spitalstr 12, CH-4031 Basel, Switzerland
[2] Univ Hosp Basel, Spitalstr 12, CH-4031 Basel, Switzerland
[3] Univ Oxford, Nuffield Dept Orthopaed Rheumatol & Musculoskelet, Ctr Stat Med, Oxford, England
[4] Univ Hosp Zurich, Clin Trials Ctr, Zurich, Switzerland
[5] Swiss Trop & Publ Hlth Inst, Basel, Switzerland
[6] Univ Hosp Basel, Dept Clin Res, Clin Trial Unit, Basel, Switzerland
[7] Tech Univ Munich, TUM Sch Med, Inst Hist & Eth Med, Munich, Germany
[8] Univ Bristol, Bristol Med Sch, Musculoskeletal Res Unit, Translat Hlth Sci, Bristol, Avon, England
[9] McMaster Univ, Dept Hlth Res Methods Evidence & Impact, Hamilton, ON, Canada
基金
瑞士国家科学基金会;
关键词
Randomized controlled trials; Feasibility assessment; Checklist; Validation; RECRUITMENT; PREVALENCE;
D O I
10.1186/s12874-022-01617-6
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background Whether there is sufficient capacity and capability for the successful conduct and delivery of a clinical trial should be assessed by several stakeholders according to transparent and evidence-based criteria during trial planning. For this openly shared, user-tested, and validated tools are necessary. Therefore, we systematically examined the public availability and content of checklists which assess the study-level feasibility in the planning phase of clinical trials. Methods In our scoping review we systematically searched Medline, EMBASE, and Google (last search, June 2021). We included all publicly available checklists or tools that assessed study level feasibility of clinical trials, examined their content, and checked whether they were user-tested or validated in any form. Data was analysed and synthesised using conventional content analysis. Results A total of 10 publicly available checklists from five countries were identified. The checklists included 48 distinct items that were classified according to the following seven different domains of clinical trial feasibility: regulation, review and oversight; participant recruitment; space, material and equipment; financial resources; trial team resources; trial management; and pilot or feasibility studies. None of the available checklists appeared to be user-tested or validated. Conclusions Although a number of publicly available checklists to assess the feasibility of clinical trials exist, their reliability and usefulness remain unclear. Openly shared, user-tested, and validated feasibility assessment tools for a better planning of clinical trials are lacking.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Scoping review and characteristics of publicly available checklists for assessing clinical trial feasibility
    Viktoria Gloy
    Benjamin Speich
    Alexandra Griessbach
    Ala Taji Heravi
    Alexandra Schulz
    Thomas Fabbro
    Christiane Pauli Magnus
    Stuart McLennan
    Wendy Bertram
    Matthias Briel
    BMC Medical Research Methodology, 22
  • [2] A scoping review of publicly available language tasks in clinical natural language processing
    Gao, Yanjun
    Dligach, Dmitriy
    Christensen, Leslie
    Tesch, Samuel
    Laffin, Ryan
    Xu, Dongfang
    Miller, Timothy
    Uzuner, Ozlem
    Churpek, Matthew M.
    Afshar, Majid
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL INFORMATICS ASSOCIATION, 2022, 29 (10) : 1797 - 1806
  • [3] Publicly available apps for cancer survivors: a scoping review
    Adam, Rosalind
    McMichael, Drew
    Powell, Daniel
    Murchie, Peter
    BMJ OPEN, 2019, 9 (09):
  • [4] SCOPING REVIEW OF PUBLICLY AVAILABLE PERFORMANCE INFORMATION IN ARGENTINA, CHILE AND COLOMBIA
    Villegas, J.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2015, 18 (07) : A851 - A851
  • [5] Remote trial elements reported in publicly available clinical trial protocols
    de Jong, Amos
    Grupstra, Renske
    Santa-Ana-Tellez, Yared
    Zuidgeest, Mira
    de Boer, Anthonius
    Gardarsdottir, Helga
    PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY AND DRUG SAFETY, 2022, 31 : 439 - 439
  • [6] ASSESSING THE FEASIBILITY OF OBTAINING PRODUCT INGREDIENT DATA FROM PUBLICLY AVAILABLE SOURCES
    BYER, WL
    JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL INFORMATION AND COMPUTER SCIENCES, 1982, 22 (04): : 190 - 195
  • [7] Left in the dark: the importance of publicly available clinical trial protocols
    Braat, Sabine
    Lee, Katherine J.
    MEDICAL JOURNAL OF AUSTRALIA, 2022, 217 (10) : 519 - 519
  • [8] Publicly Available Online Educational Videos Regarding Pediatric Needle Pain A Scoping Review
    Farkas, Cameron
    Solodiuk, Lydia
    Taddio, Anna
    Franck, Linda
    Berberich, F. Ralph
    LoChiatto, Joyce
    Solodiuk, Jean C.
    CLINICAL JOURNAL OF PAIN, 2015, 31 (06): : 591 - 598
  • [9] A scoping review of the reporting quality of reviews of commercially and publicly available mobile health apps
    Gasteiger, Norina
    Norman, Gill
    Grainger, Rebecca
    van der Veer, Sabine N.
    Mcgarrigle, Lisa
    Jones, Debra
    Eost-Telling, Charlotte
    Vercell, Amy
    Ford, Claire R.
    Ali, Syed Mustafa
    Law, Kate
    Zhao, Qimeng
    Byerly, Matthew
    Shi, Chunhu
    Davies, Alan
    Hall, Alex
    Dowding, Dawn
    JAMIA OPEN, 2025, 8 (01)
  • [10] Characteristics of publicly available skin cancer image datasets: a systematic review
    Wen, David
    Khan, Saad M.
    Xu, Antonio Ji
    Ibrahim, Hussein
    Smith, Luke
    Caballero, Jose
    Zepeda, Luis
    Perez, Carlos de Blas
    Denniston, Alastair K.
    Liu, Xiaoxuan
    Matin, Rubeta N.
    LANCET DIGITAL HEALTH, 2022, 4 (01): : E64 - E74