Qualitative studies conducted alongside randomized controlled trials in oncology: A scoping review of use and rigour of reporting.

Clinical trials Neoplasms Psych-oncology Qualitative research Randomized controlled trial Research design Trial-sibling

Journal

International journal of nursing studies
ISSN: 1873-491X
Titre abrégé: Int J Nurs Stud
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0400675

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Apr 2022
Historique:
received: 13 03 2021
revised: 22 12 2021
accepted: 05 01 2022
pubmed: 21 2 2022
medline: 17 3 2022
entrez: 20 2 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for generating evidence to inform clinical oncology practice. Knowledge gained through qualitative research methodologies can be complementary to that gained through RCTs. How qualitative research has been combined with RCTs in oncology has not been previously characterized. This scoping review was conducted to summarize how qualitative research associated with RCTs in the oncology setting has been conducted and examine the quality of reporting. Manuscripts reporting on qualitative research linked with RCTs in the cancer context that involved patients (both adult and pediatric) and/or informal caregiver (friends/family) were included. Peer-reviewed manuscripts indexed in MEDLINE (OVID) and CINAHL, published in English between 2008 and January 2019. Formal scoping review methods were followed. A data extraction tool informed by the research questions as well as the COnsolidated criteria for REporting Qualitative research (COREQ) was utilized. Extraction was conducted independently by two authors, with disagreements resolved by a third. Fifty-four articles were included. Assessing information sharing, diet/exercise, and psychotherapeutic interventions were the most common focuses of the RCTs. The most common focus of the qualitative component was on gaining insight into the experience of receiving the intervention or participating in RCT procedures. How the intervention impacted the cancer experience was not a common focus of the qualitative components. Some reports provided insufficient information to understand how the qualitative components aligned with the RCT components. The results of the qualitative and RCT components were not integrated to draw meaningful conclusions about the efficacy of the intervention under study in most cases. Reports focusing on only qualitative methods had higher median (Mdn) reporting of COREQ items compared to reports that included both the qualitative and RCT components (Mdn = 18 vs. Mdn = 14, respectively; p <0.001). This review identified that qualitative research has been combined with RCTs in the cancer context in a number of ways, most commonly to understand the experience of receiving study interventions or participating in trial procedures. Exploring how interventions impact other aspects of the cancer experience is an approach that should be considered in future work. Formalized guidelines for the design and reporting of investigations that combine qualitative and RCT approaches in the cancer context are expected to be of value. Combining qualitative research with randomized controlled trials in oncology: an impornt opportunity for discovery.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for generating evidence to inform clinical oncology practice. Knowledge gained through qualitative research methodologies can be complementary to that gained through RCTs. How qualitative research has been combined with RCTs in oncology has not been previously characterized.
OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE
This scoping review was conducted to summarize how qualitative research associated with RCTs in the oncology setting has been conducted and examine the quality of reporting.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA METHODS
Manuscripts reporting on qualitative research linked with RCTs in the cancer context that involved patients (both adult and pediatric) and/or informal caregiver (friends/family) were included.
SOURCES OF EVIDENCE METHODS
Peer-reviewed manuscripts indexed in MEDLINE (OVID) and CINAHL, published in English between 2008 and January 2019.
CHARTING METHODS METHODS
Formal scoping review methods were followed. A data extraction tool informed by the research questions as well as the COnsolidated criteria for REporting Qualitative research (COREQ) was utilized. Extraction was conducted independently by two authors, with disagreements resolved by a third.
RESULTS RESULTS
Fifty-four articles were included. Assessing information sharing, diet/exercise, and psychotherapeutic interventions were the most common focuses of the RCTs. The most common focus of the qualitative component was on gaining insight into the experience of receiving the intervention or participating in RCT procedures. How the intervention impacted the cancer experience was not a common focus of the qualitative components. Some reports provided insufficient information to understand how the qualitative components aligned with the RCT components. The results of the qualitative and RCT components were not integrated to draw meaningful conclusions about the efficacy of the intervention under study in most cases. Reports focusing on only qualitative methods had higher median (Mdn) reporting of COREQ items compared to reports that included both the qualitative and RCT components (Mdn = 18 vs. Mdn = 14, respectively; p <0.001).
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
This review identified that qualitative research has been combined with RCTs in the cancer context in a number of ways, most commonly to understand the experience of receiving study interventions or participating in trial procedures. Exploring how interventions impact other aspects of the cancer experience is an approach that should be considered in future work. Formalized guidelines for the design and reporting of investigations that combine qualitative and RCT approaches in the cancer context are expected to be of value.
TWEETABLE ABSTRACT CONCLUSIONS
Combining qualitative research with randomized controlled trials in oncology: an impornt opportunity for discovery.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35183865
pii: S0020-7489(22)00003-7
doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2022.104174
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

104174

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of Competing Interest None.

Auteurs

M Thiessen (M)

Faculty of Nursing, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada; Section of Oncology and Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. Electronic address: maclean.thiessen@umanitoba.ca.

D Harris (D)

Faculty of Nursing, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.

A Pinches (A)

Knowledge Resource Services, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

M Vaska (M)

Knowledge Resource Services, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

N Moules (N)

Faculty of Nursing, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.

S Raffin Bouchal (S)

Faculty of Nursing, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.

S Sinclair (S)

Faculty of Nursing, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada; Department of Oncology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH