SWATted away: the challenging experience of setting up a programme of SWATs in paediatric trials.
challenges
embedded trials
governance
methodology
paediatrics
randomised controlled trials
‘SStudy Within A Trial’ (SWAT)
Journal
Trials
ISSN: 1745-6215
Titre abrégé: Trials
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101263253
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
19 Feb 2019
19 Feb 2019
Historique:
received:
31
07
2018
accepted:
31
01
2019
entrez:
21
2
2019
pubmed:
21
2
2019
medline:
14
6
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Randomised controlled trials are considered the best method for determining the effectiveness and safety of health interventions. Trials involving children are essential to ensure that treatments are safe and effective. However, many trials, in both adult and paediatric populations, do not achieve recruitment targets and/or maintain retention of participants, which can lead to a reduction in the internal and external validity of the results. Identifying ways of improving trial efficiency are important in order to increase the successful completion of trials. A 'Study Within A Trial' (SWAT) is a self-contained study embedded within an ongoing trial, which aims to establish evidence to improve the management and delivery of trials in healthcare. Increasing numbers of SWATs have been undertaken in recent years yet very few within paediatric trials. Herein, we describe some of the challenges with undertaking a programme of SWATs within paediatric clinical trials in the UK. The TRECA (TRials Engagement in Children and Adolescents) study involves developing multimedia websites for use within paediatric trials to provide recruitment information to children, young people and their families about the clinical trial. Challenges encountered included governance issues such as host trial approval processes and sharing of anonymised data, funding issues for host trials, internet quality and accessibility within the healthcare setting, and ethical concerns associated with SWAT methodology. We believe the ethical concerns are more pronounced in the paediatric setting, perhaps because of the fewer SWATs undertaken in these settings or that a more cautious, risk-averse approach to undertaking research with children is taken. SWATs are becoming increasingly common to provide an evidence base for methods to improve trial efficiency. However, we encountered a number of unanticipated challenges to embedding TRECA that have not been previously reported within the scientific literature. We believe that, if these issues were addressed through wider promotion and explanation of undertaking SWATs involving all key stakeholders, as well as by exploration of alternative funding models for SWATs, this would enable more streamlined, appropriate and timely processes for SWATs and a stronger evidence base for what works to increase trial efficiency. The TRECA study is registered on ISRCTN, ID 73136092 . Registered on 24 August 2016.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Randomised controlled trials are considered the best method for determining the effectiveness and safety of health interventions. Trials involving children are essential to ensure that treatments are safe and effective. However, many trials, in both adult and paediatric populations, do not achieve recruitment targets and/or maintain retention of participants, which can lead to a reduction in the internal and external validity of the results. Identifying ways of improving trial efficiency are important in order to increase the successful completion of trials.
MAIN BODY
METHODS
A 'Study Within A Trial' (SWAT) is a self-contained study embedded within an ongoing trial, which aims to establish evidence to improve the management and delivery of trials in healthcare. Increasing numbers of SWATs have been undertaken in recent years yet very few within paediatric trials. Herein, we describe some of the challenges with undertaking a programme of SWATs within paediatric clinical trials in the UK. The TRECA (TRials Engagement in Children and Adolescents) study involves developing multimedia websites for use within paediatric trials to provide recruitment information to children, young people and their families about the clinical trial. Challenges encountered included governance issues such as host trial approval processes and sharing of anonymised data, funding issues for host trials, internet quality and accessibility within the healthcare setting, and ethical concerns associated with SWAT methodology. We believe the ethical concerns are more pronounced in the paediatric setting, perhaps because of the fewer SWATs undertaken in these settings or that a more cautious, risk-averse approach to undertaking research with children is taken.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
SWATs are becoming increasingly common to provide an evidence base for methods to improve trial efficiency. However, we encountered a number of unanticipated challenges to embedding TRECA that have not been previously reported within the scientific literature. We believe that, if these issues were addressed through wider promotion and explanation of undertaking SWATs involving all key stakeholders, as well as by exploration of alternative funding models for SWATs, this would enable more streamlined, appropriate and timely processes for SWATs and a stronger evidence base for what works to increase trial efficiency.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
The TRECA study is registered on ISRCTN, ID 73136092 . Registered on 24 August 2016.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30782209
doi: 10.1186/s13063-019-3236-4
pii: 10.1186/s13063-019-3236-4
pmc: PMC6381684
doi:
Types de publication
Letter
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
141Subventions
Organisme : Department of Health
ID : HS&DR/14/21/21
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Chief Scientist Office
ID : HSRU1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Health Services and Delivery Research Programme
ID : 14/21/21
Références
Pediatrics. 2012 Jun;129 Suppl 3:S118-23
pubmed: 22661757
Br J Psychiatry. 2016 Feb;208(2):189-94
pubmed: 26382948
Trials. 2018 Sep 10;19(1):481
pubmed: 30201022
Bull Med Ethics. 2004 Feb;(195):13-6
pubmed: 15812989
Trials. 2017 Jun 8;18(1):265
pubmed: 28595613
Lancet. 2016 Apr 9;387(10027):1573-1586
pubmed: 26423180
Ethics Behav. 1991;1(4):239-52
pubmed: 11651140
BMJ Open. 2017 Mar 20;7(3):e015276
pubmed: 28320800
Trials. 2018 Feb 23;19(1):139
pubmed: 29475444
Trials. 2014 Oct 25;15:407
pubmed: 25344684
Lancet. 2014 Jan 11;383(9912):166-75
pubmed: 24411645
BMJ Open. 2019 Jan 9;9(1):e023984
pubmed: 30782720
J Child Health Care. 2019 Sep;23(3):468-482
pubmed: 30384772
BMJ. 2015 Sep 25;351:h4923
pubmed: 26408289
Acad Med. 2011 Nov;86(11):1360-6
pubmed: 21952064
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Feb 22;2:MR000013
pubmed: 29468635
Trials. 2016 Jan 14;17:27
pubmed: 26767365
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010 Apr 30;10:38
pubmed: 20433728