A good use of time? Providing evidence for how effort is invested in primary and secondary outcome data collection in trials.
Core outcome sets
Data collection
Outcomes
Randomised trials
Research waste
Journal
Trials
ISSN: 1745-6215
Titre abrégé: Trials
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101263253
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
27 Dec 2022
27 Dec 2022
Historique:
received:
17
06
2022
accepted:
02
12
2022
entrez:
27
12
2022
pubmed:
28
12
2022
medline:
28
12
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Data collection is a substantial part of trial workload for participants and staff alike. How these hours of work are spent is important because stakeholders are more interested in some outcomes than others. The ORINOCO study compared the time spent collecting primary outcome data to the time spent collecting secondary outcome data in a cohort of trials. We searched PubMed for phase III trials indexed between 2015 and 2019. From these, we randomly selected 120 trials evaluating a therapeutic intervention plus an additional random selection of 20 trials evaluating a public health intervention. We also added eligible trials from a cohort of 189 trials in rheumatology that had used the same core outcome set. We then obtained the time taken to collect primary and secondary outcomes in each trial. We used a hierarchy of methods that included data in trial reports, contacting the trial team and approaching individuals with experience of using the identified outcome measures. We calculated the primary to secondary data collection time ratio and notional data collection cost for each included trial. We included 161 trials (120 phase III; 21 core outcome set; 20 public health), which together collected 230 primary and 688 secondary outcomes. Full primary and secondary timing data were obtained for 134 trials (100 phase III; 17 core outcome set; 17 public health). The median time spent on primaries was 56.1 h (range: 0.0-10,746.7, IQR: 226.89) and the median time spent on secondaries was 190.7 hours (range: 0.0-1,356,832.9, IQR: 617.6). The median primary to secondary data collection time ratio was 1.0:3.0 (i.e. for every minute spent on primary outcomes, 3.0 were spent on secondaries). The ratio varied by trial type: phase III trials were 1.0:3.1, core outcome set 1.0:3.4 and public health trials 1.0:2.2. The median notional overall data collection cost was £8015.73 (range: £52.90-£31,899,140.70, IQR: £20,096.64). Depending on trial type, between two and three times as much time is spent collecting secondary outcome data than collecting primary outcome data. Trial teams should explicitly consider how long it will take to collect the data for an outcome and decide whether that time is worth it given importance of the outcome to the trial.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Data collection is a substantial part of trial workload for participants and staff alike. How these hours of work are spent is important because stakeholders are more interested in some outcomes than others. The ORINOCO study compared the time spent collecting primary outcome data to the time spent collecting secondary outcome data in a cohort of trials.
METHODS
METHODS
We searched PubMed for phase III trials indexed between 2015 and 2019. From these, we randomly selected 120 trials evaluating a therapeutic intervention plus an additional random selection of 20 trials evaluating a public health intervention. We also added eligible trials from a cohort of 189 trials in rheumatology that had used the same core outcome set. We then obtained the time taken to collect primary and secondary outcomes in each trial. We used a hierarchy of methods that included data in trial reports, contacting the trial team and approaching individuals with experience of using the identified outcome measures. We calculated the primary to secondary data collection time ratio and notional data collection cost for each included trial.
RESULTS
RESULTS
We included 161 trials (120 phase III; 21 core outcome set; 20 public health), which together collected 230 primary and 688 secondary outcomes. Full primary and secondary timing data were obtained for 134 trials (100 phase III; 17 core outcome set; 17 public health). The median time spent on primaries was 56.1 h (range: 0.0-10,746.7, IQR: 226.89) and the median time spent on secondaries was 190.7 hours (range: 0.0-1,356,832.9, IQR: 617.6). The median primary to secondary data collection time ratio was 1.0:3.0 (i.e. for every minute spent on primary outcomes, 3.0 were spent on secondaries). The ratio varied by trial type: phase III trials were 1.0:3.1, core outcome set 1.0:3.4 and public health trials 1.0:2.2. The median notional overall data collection cost was £8015.73 (range: £52.90-£31,899,140.70, IQR: £20,096.64).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Depending on trial type, between two and three times as much time is spent collecting secondary outcome data than collecting primary outcome data. Trial teams should explicitly consider how long it will take to collect the data for an outcome and decide whether that time is worth it given importance of the outcome to the trial.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36575542
doi: 10.1186/s13063-022-06973-8
pii: 10.1186/s13063-022-06973-8
pmc: PMC9793601
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1047Subventions
Organisme : Chief Scientist Office
ID : HSRU1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Chief Scientist Office, Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorate
ID : HIPS/18/04
Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
PLoS One. 2016 Jun 17;11(6):e0157883
pubmed: 27314853
Am J Ther. 2015 Mar-Apr;22(2):117-24
pubmed: 23429165
PLoS One. 2019 Sep 13;14(9):e0222418
pubmed: 31518375
J Clin Epidemiol. 2021 Jan;129:114-123
pubmed: 32987162
Trials. 2017 May 2;18(1):203
pubmed: 28464930
BMJ Open. 2022 Feb 14;12(2):e059230
pubmed: 35165116
Trials. 2021 May 10;22(1):340
pubmed: 33971933
BMJ. 2017 May 17;357:j2262
pubmed: 28515234
Lancet. 2019 Jun 1;393(10187):2213-2221
pubmed: 31030986
Trials. 2020 Jun 16;21(1):535
pubmed: 32546192
Trials. 2019 Oct 15;20(1):593
pubmed: 31615577
Trials. 2007 Nov 26;8:38
pubmed: 18039364
Clin Trials. 2013 Aug;10(4):624-32
pubmed: 23785066
Trials. 2017 Mar 14;18(1):122
pubmed: 28288676
Lancet. 2009 Jul 4;374(9683):86-9
pubmed: 19525005
Trials. 2022 Jun 27;23(1):537
pubmed: 35761293
JAMA. 2014 Mar 12;311(10):1045-51
pubmed: 24618966
Trials. 2017 Jun 20;18(Suppl 3):280
pubmed: 28681707
J Clin Epidemiol. 2022 Feb;142:19-28
pubmed: 34715310
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Jan 19;(1):MR000031
pubmed: 21249714
Am J Ther. 2008 Sep-Oct;15(5):450-7
pubmed: 18806521