Getting it wrong most of the time? Comparing trialists' choice of primary outcome with what patients and health professionals want.
Clinical trials
Outcomes
Trial methodology
Journal
Trials
ISSN: 1745-6215
Titre abrégé: Trials
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101263253
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
27 Jun 2022
27 Jun 2022
Historique:
received:
16
11
2021
accepted:
25
04
2022
entrez:
27
6
2022
pubmed:
28
6
2022
medline:
30
6
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Randomised trials support improved decision-making through the data they collect. One important piece of data is the primary outcome - so called because it is what the investigators decide is the most important. Secondary outcomes provide additional information to support decision-making. We were interested in knowing how important patients and healthcare professionals consider the outcomes (especially the primary outcome) measured in a selection of published trials. The work had three stages: (1) We identified a body of late-stage trials in two clinical areas, breast cancer management and nephrology. (2) We identified the primary and secondary outcomes for these trials. (3) We randomly ordered these outcomes and presented them to patients and healthcare professionals (with experience of the clinical area), and we asked them to rank the importance of the outcomes. They were not told which outcomes trial authors considered primary and secondary. In our sample of 44 trials with 46 primary outcomes, 29 patients, one patient representative and 12 healthcare professionals together ranked the primary outcome as the most important outcome 13/46 times or 28%. Breast cancer patients and healthcare professionals considered the primary outcome to be the most important outcome for 8/21 primary outcomes chosen by trialists. For nephrology, the equivalent figure was 5/25. The primary outcome appeared in a respondent's top 5 ranked outcomes 151/178 (85%) times for breast cancer and 225/259 (87%) times for nephrology even if the primary was not considered the most important outcome. The primary outcome in a trial is the most important piece of data collected. It is used to determine how many participants are required, and it is the main piece of information used to judge whether the intervention is effective or not. In our study, patients and healthcare professionals agreed with the choice of the primary outcome made by trial teams doing late-stage trials in breast cancer management and nephrology 28% of the time.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Randomised trials support improved decision-making through the data they collect. One important piece of data is the primary outcome - so called because it is what the investigators decide is the most important. Secondary outcomes provide additional information to support decision-making. We were interested in knowing how important patients and healthcare professionals consider the outcomes (especially the primary outcome) measured in a selection of published trials.
METHODS
METHODS
The work had three stages: (1) We identified a body of late-stage trials in two clinical areas, breast cancer management and nephrology. (2) We identified the primary and secondary outcomes for these trials. (3) We randomly ordered these outcomes and presented them to patients and healthcare professionals (with experience of the clinical area), and we asked them to rank the importance of the outcomes. They were not told which outcomes trial authors considered primary and secondary.
RESULTS
RESULTS
In our sample of 44 trials with 46 primary outcomes, 29 patients, one patient representative and 12 healthcare professionals together ranked the primary outcome as the most important outcome 13/46 times or 28%. Breast cancer patients and healthcare professionals considered the primary outcome to be the most important outcome for 8/21 primary outcomes chosen by trialists. For nephrology, the equivalent figure was 5/25. The primary outcome appeared in a respondent's top 5 ranked outcomes 151/178 (85%) times for breast cancer and 225/259 (87%) times for nephrology even if the primary was not considered the most important outcome.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The primary outcome in a trial is the most important piece of data collected. It is used to determine how many participants are required, and it is the main piece of information used to judge whether the intervention is effective or not. In our study, patients and healthcare professionals agreed with the choice of the primary outcome made by trial teams doing late-stage trials in breast cancer management and nephrology 28% of the time.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35761293
doi: 10.1186/s13063-022-06348-z
pii: 10.1186/s13063-022-06348-z
pmc: PMC9235090
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
537Subventions
Organisme : Chief Scientist Office
ID : HSRU1
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
BMJ. 2010 Nov 01;341:c5707
pubmed: 21041324
Am J Ther. 2015 Mar-Apr;22(2):117-24
pubmed: 23429165
Trials. 2020 Jun 16;21(1):535
pubmed: 32546192
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2019 Jul 1;34(7):1084-1089
pubmed: 31190058
Trials. 2013 Jan 22;14:21
pubmed: 23339751
BMJ. 2010 Mar 23;340:c869
pubmed: 20332511
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2021 May 27;36(6):956-959
pubmed: 33221905
Trials. 2017 Mar 14;18(1):122
pubmed: 28288676
Trials. 2017 Jun 20;18(Suppl 3):280
pubmed: 28681707
J Clin Epidemiol. 2022 Feb;142:19-28
pubmed: 34715310
BMJ. 2010 Aug 18;341:c3653
pubmed: 20719823
J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Aug;88:4-6
pubmed: 28529183