Why clinical trial outcomes fail to translate into benefits for patients

LNDb v4: pulmonary nodule annotation from medical reports

Given the high prevalence of lung cancer, an accurate diagnosis is crucial. In the diagnosis process, radiologists play an important role by examining numerous radiology exams to identify different types of nodules. To aid the clinicians' analytical efforts, computer-aided diagnosis can streamline the process of identifying pulmonary nodules. For this purpose, medical reports can serve as valuable sources for automatically retrieving image annotations. Our study focused on converting medical reports into nodule annotations, matching textual information with manually annotated data from the Lung Nodule Database (LNDb)-a comprehensive repository of lung scans and nodule annotations. As a result of this study, we have released a tabular data file containing information from 292 medical reports in the LNDb, along with files detailing nodule characteristics and corresponding matches to the manually annotated data. The objective is to enable further research studies in lung cancer by bridging the gap between existing reports and additional manual annotations that may be collected, thereby fostering discussions about the advantages and disadvantages between these two data types.

A Core Outcome Set for Efficacy of Acute Treatment of Hereditary Angioedema

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials investigating drugs for the acute treatment of hereditary angioedema attacks have assessed many different outcomes. This heterogeneity limits the comparability of trial results and may lead to selective outcome reporting bias and a high burden on trial participants.

OBJECTIVE

To achieve consensus on a core outcome set composed of key outcomes that ideally should be used in all clinical efficacy trials involving the acute treatment of hereditary angioedema attacks.

METHODS

We conducted a Delphi consensus study involving all relevant parties: patients with hereditary angioedema, hereditary angioedema expert clinicians and clinical researchers, pharmaceutical companies, and regulatory bodies. Two Internet-based survey rounds were conducted. In round 1, panelists indicated the importance of individual outcomes used in clinical trials on a 9-point Likert scale. Based on these results, a core outcome set was developed and voted on by panelists in round 2.

RESULTS

A total of 58 worldwide panelists completed both rounds. The first round demonstrated high importance scores and substantial agreement among the panelists. In the second round, a consensus of 90% or greater was achieved on a core outcome set consisting of five key outcomes: change in overall symptom severity at one predetermined time point between 15 minutes and 4 hours after treatment, time to end of progression of all symptoms, the need for rescue medication during the entire attack, impairment of daily activities, and treatment satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

This international study obtained a high level of consensus on a core outcome set for the acute treatment of hereditary angioedema attacks, consisting of five key outcomes.

Burden from Study Questionnaire on Patient Fatigue in Qualitative Congestive Heart Failure Research

Mixed methods research forms the backbone of translational research methodologies. Qualitative research and subjective data lead to hypothesis generation and ideas that are then proven via quantitative methodologies and gathering objective data. In this vein, clinical trials that generate subjective data may have limitations, when they are not followed through with quantitative data, in terms of their ability to be considered gold standard evidence and inform guidelines and clinical management. However, since many research methods utilise qualitative tools, an initial factor is that such tools can create a burden on patients and researchers. In addition, the quantity of data and its storage contributes to noise and quality issues for its primary and post hoc use. This paper discusses the issue of the burden of subjective data collected and fatigue in the context of congestive heart failure (CHF) research. The CHF population has a high baseline morbidity, so no doubt the focus should be on the content; however, the lengths of the instruments are a product of their vigorous validation processes. Nonetheless, as an important source of hypothesis generation, if a choice of follow-up qualitative assessment is required for a clinical trial, shorter versions of the questionnaire should be used, without compromising the data collection requirements; otherwise, we need to invest in this area and find suitable solutions.

Patient listening on social media for patient-focused drug development: a synthesis of considerations from patients, industry and regulators

Patients, life science industry and regulatory authorities are united in their goal to reduce the disease burden of patients by closing remaining unmet needs. Patients have, however, not always been systematically and consistently involved in the drug development process. Recognizing this gap, regulatory bodies worldwide have initiated patient-focused drug development (PFDD) initiatives to foster a more systematic involvement of patients in the drug development process and to ensure that outcomes measured in clinical trials are truly relevant to patients and represent significant improvements to their quality of life. As a source of real-world evidence (RWE), social media has been consistently shown to capture the first-hand, spontaneous and unfiltered disease and treatment experience of patients and is acknowledged as a valid method for generating patient experience data by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). While social media listening (SML) methods are increasingly applied to many diseases and use cases, a significant piece of uncertainty remains on how evidence derived from social media can be used in the drug development process and how it can impact regulatory decision making, including legal and ethical aspects. In this policy paper, we review the perspectives of three key stakeholder groups on the role of SML in drug development, namely patients, life science companies and regulators. We also carry out a systematic review of current practices and use cases for SML and, in particular, highlight benefits and drawbacks for the use of SML as a way to identify unmet needs of patients. While we find that the stakeholders are strongly aligned regarding the potential of social media for PFDD, we identify key areas in which regulatory guidance is needed to reduce uncertainty regarding the impact of SML as a source of patient experience data that has impact on regulatory decision making.

Development of a Core Outcome Set for Dysphagia Interventions in Parkinson's disease (COS-DIP): study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Current clinical trials on swallowing disorders (dysphagia) in Parkinson's disease (PD) apply a high variety of outcomes and different outcome measures making comparative effectiveness research challenging. Furthermore, views of patients and dysphagia clinicians when selecting trial outcomes have not been considered in the past, thus study results may have little importance to them. This study aims to develop an agreed standardised Core Outcome Set for Dysphagia Interventions in Parkinson's disease (COS-DIP), systematically measured and reported as a minimum for all clinical trials. It will also comprise guidance on outcome definitions, outcome measures and time points of measurement.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The COS-DIP development will comprise five stages following established methodology: (1) a recent scoping review on all applied outcomes, their definitions, methods and time points of measurement in clinical trials in dysphagia in PD, (2) online surveys and focus groups with clinicians, patients, caregivers and family members to identify outcomes that are important to them, (3) an identified list of outcomes based on results of stage 1 and 2, (4) three round online Delphi survey with up to 200 key stakeholders to determine core outcomes and (5) two online consensus meetings with up to 40 representative key stakeholders to agree on all outcomes, definitions, methods and time points of measurement in the final COS-DIP.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Full ethical approval was obtained from the Research Ethics Committee, School of Linguistic, Speech and Communication Sciences, Trinity College Dublin, on 15 May 2023 (HT27). Dissemination of the COS-DIP will be enhanced through presentations at (inter-) national conferences and through peer-reviewed, open access publications of related manuscripts. Lay and professional information sheets and infographics will be circulated through relevant patient and professional organisations and networks.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

The COS-DIP study was registered prospectively with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) database on 24 September 2021 (www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/1942).

Outcomes measured in studies assessing health systems interventions for type 1 diabetes management: A scoping review

AIMS

Describe the outcomes reported in research on health systems interventions for type 1 diabetes management in comparison to the outcomes proposed by a core outcome set (COS) for this condition, an essential list of outcomes that studies should measure.

METHODS

Systematic search of studies published between 2010 and 2021 reporting health systems interventions directed to improve the management of type 1 diabetes using PubMed, EMBASE and CENTRAL. Information on the outcomes was extracted and classified according to a COS: self-management, level of clinical engagement, perceived control over diabetes, diabetes-related quality of life, diabetes burden, diabetes ketoacidosis, severe hypoglycemia, and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1C).

RESULTS

187 studies were included. Most of the studies included either children (n = 82/187) or adults (n = 82/187) living with type 1 diabetes. The most common outcome measured was HbA1C (n = 149/187), followed by self-management (n = 105/187). While the least measured ones were diabetes ketoacidosis (n = 15/187), and clinical engagement (n = 0/187). None of the studies measured all the outcomes recommended in the COS. Additionally, different tools were found to be used in measuring the same outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a description of what researchers are measuring when assessing health systems interventions to improve type 1 diabetes management. In contrast to a COS, it was found that there is a predominance of clinical-based outcomes over patient-reported outcome measures.

Development and validation of TreatHSP-QoL: a patient-reported outcome measure for health-related quality of life in hereditary spastic paraplegia

BACKGROUND

Hereditary spastic paraplegia (HSP) is a rare neurodegenerative disease that lacks specific and validated patient-centered outcome measures (PCOMs). We aimed to develop and validate a health-related quality of life (HRQoL) questionnaire specific to HSP ("TreatHSP-QoL") that could be used as a PCOM.

RESULTS

The pilot-items of the TreatHSP-QoL (45 five-level Likert scale items, with values per item between 0 and 4) were developed based on a qualitative data analysis of 54 semi-structured interviews, conducted in person with 36 HSP patients and 18 caregivers. It was then reduced and modified through the validation process to 25 items. The main validation was performed using the online questionnaire in 242 HSP patients and 56 caregivers. The exploratory factor analysis defined five subdomains. Cronbach's alpha ranged from 0.57 to 0.85 for the subdomains and reached 0.85 for the total score. The test-retest Pearson correlation reached 0.86 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) [0.79, 0.91]). Pearson correlations with the EuroQol-5 Dimension (5 levels) (EQ-5D-5L) and Friedreich Ataxia Rating Scale-Activities of Daily Living (FARS-ADL) questionnaires varied strongly among the subdomains, with the total scores reaching 0.53 (95% CI [0.42, 0.61]) and -0.45 (95% CI [- 0.55, - 0.35]), respectively. The caregiver-patient response Pearson correlation ranged between 0.64 and 0.82 for subdomains and reached 0.65 (95% CI [0.38, 0.81]) for the total score.

CONCLUSIONS

TreatHSP-QoL can be used in high-quality clinical trials and clinical practice as a disease-specific PCOM (i.e., HRQoL measure) and is also applicable as a proxy questionnaire. Score values between 0 and 100 can be reached, where higher value represents better HRQoL. The Pearson correlations to the EQ-5D-5L and FARS-ADL support the additional value and need of HSP-specific PCOM, while non-specific QoL-assessment and specific clinical self-assessment tools already exist. All in all, the results demonstrate good validity and reliability for this new patient-centered questionnaire for HSP.

Understanding dentatorubral-pallidoluysian atrophy (DRPLA) symptoms and impacts on daily life: a qualitative interview study with patients and caregivers

Background

Dentatorubral-pallidoluysian atrophy (DRPLA) is a rare, neurodegenerative disorder with no disease-modifying treatments. There is a dearth of information in the literature about the patient and caregiver experience living with DRPLA.

Objectives

This study aimed to (1) understand symptoms experienced by adult- and juvenile-onset DRPLA populations and their impact on daily life and (2) explore patient and caregiver treatment goals and clinical trial participation preferences.

Design

The study was a qualitative interview study.

Methods

Interviews were conducted remotely with adult patients with DRPLA and caregivers. Participants described patient symptoms and the impact of those symptoms on daily life, and they discussed treatment goals and potential clinical trial participation. There were 18 patients described in the interviews with two patients and seven caregivers. Some participants were caregivers to multiple patients with DRPLA.

Results

Interview transcripts were coded for themes, and reported symptoms were summarized with descriptive statistics. Adult-onset patients (N = 7) experienced difficulty with ataxia (100%), cognition (100%), fine motor skills (100%), gross motor skills (100%), speech (100%), personality changes (100%), and seizures (57%). Juvenile-onset patients (N = 11) experienced difficulty with ataxia (100%), sleep (100%), speech (100%), jerking/twitching (83%), behavior (82%), cognition (82%), fine motor skills (82%), gross motor skills (82%), sensory sensitivity (75%), and seizures (64%). When considering aspects of DRPLA to target for future treatment, patients prioritized ataxia/mobility (100%), juvenile-onset caregivers prioritized ataxia/mobility (60%) and independence (60%), and adult-onset caregivers prioritized personality (60%). Almost all patients (93%) would participate in a clinical trial if given the opportunity, but travel to a clinical site could pose a participation barrier for half.

Conclusion

This study found that there are symptom domains that are relevant across the DRPLA population, but there is heterogeneity within each domain based on the age of symptom onset and disease stage, which has implications for clinical trial design.

Definition and reporting of composite outcomes are often inadequate in randomized clinical trials on pharmacological interventions for coronary artery disease

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the frequency and critically appraise the use and reporting of composite outcomes in randomized clinical trials on pharmacological interventions for coronary artery disease.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

A metaresearch study. A search strategy was developed to retrieve references from MEDLINE. We considered articles, published from 1st January 2020, to December 31, 2021, reporting results of clinical primary outcomes from randomized clinical trials which assessed pharmacological interventions, used alone or in combination, for the treatment or secondary prevention (previous coronary event) of coronary artery disease.

RESULTS

From the 34 included studies, 28 (82.35%) had a primary composite outcome. Thirteen unique composite primary outcomes were used with the most frequent being "cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke" (12/28, 42.86%). The term major adverse cardiac events was used for five distinct composite primary outcomes. A combination of 12 different components resulted in the 28 primary composite outcomes, with stroke being the most frequent component present in 96.43% (27/28) of the primary composite outcomes. From the included studies, 60.71% (17/28) reported the estimates for each individual component and the direction of the effect was consistent between all components and the composite outcomes in 58.82% (10/17) of them. Additionally, no included study discussed potential limitations and/or related advantages of the composite outcomes.

CONCLUSION

In randomized clinical trials on pharmacological interventions for coronary artery disease, composite outcomes are frequently used, but the definition of their components is very heterogeneous. The estimate for individual components within the composite outcome is often not fully reported, which prevents a complete analysis of their adequacy for clinical practice. The term major adverse cardiac events was used inconsistently and to refer to different set of components, which can also be misleading and confusing.

Challenges of Health Data Use in Multidisciplinary Chronic Disease Care: Perspective from Heart Failure Care

The healthcare sector generates approximately 30% of all the world's data volume, mostly for record keeping, compliance and regulatory requirements, and patient care. Healthcare data often exist in silos or on different systems and platforms due to decentralised storage and data protection laws, limiting accessibility for health service research. Thus, both the lack of access to data and more importantly the inability to control data quality and explore post-trial (phase IV) data or data with translational relevance have an impact on optimising care and research of congestive heart failure (CHF). We highlight that for some diseases, such as CHF, generating non-traditional data has significant importance, but is hindered by the logistics of accessing chronic disease data from separate health silos and by various levels of data quality. Modern multidisciplinary healthcare management of cardiovascular diseases-especially when spanning across community hubs to tertiary healthcare centres-increases the complexities involved between data privacy and access to data for healthcare and health service research. We call for an increased ability to leverage health data across systems, devices, and countries.

Patient engagement as a core element of translating clinical evidence into practice- application of the COM-B model behaviour change model

BACKGROUND

The results of rehabilitation trials are often not fully attained when the intervention is implemented beyond the initial trial. One of the key reasons is that a patients' ability and/or capacity to take part in their own healthcare is not considered in the trial design yet has significant impact on the outcomes during the implementation phase.

BODY OF TEXT

We propose a shift from a therapist-focus to patient-focus in trial design, through addressing patient engagement as a core consideration in trials. We argue that engaging patients in any rehabilitation program is a process of behavioural change. Exercise prescription is used as an example to illustrate how the Behaviour Change Wheel can be applied to analyse barriers and facilitators associated with patients' capabilities, opportunities and motivations in integrating trial interventions into their daily life. We propose a framework to assist in this shift.

CONCLUSION

A core part of implementing rehabilitation interventions at the primary care level requires patient engagement. Related aspects of interventions should be identified and assessed using the COM-B model at the outset of trial design to ensure that the results are realistic, meaningful and transferable, so as to enable real impact.

Assessing neuro-oncology clinical trial impact and value: Testing a novel multi-criteria decision analysis app

BACKGROUND

Many clinical trials are conducted globally, creating challenges in deciding which trial outcomes deserve a clinician's focus and where to direct limited resources. Determining the 'value' of a clinical trial relative to others could be useful in this context. The aim of this study was to test a novel web-based application using multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to rank clinical trial value.

METHODS

The MCDA tool combines seven metrics: unmet need; target population size; access; outcomes; cost; academic impact and use of results. Clinical trials were ranked according to their calculated 'value' - meaning the importance or worth of a trial. We determined face validity of the app using a set of ten published Phase 3 neuro-oncology clinical trials. A survey of neuro-oncology clinicians asked them to rank the same ten clinical trials, and to rank the seven metrics in terms of importance.

RESULTS

The two highest app-ranked trials were in concordance with that of the survey respondents, and consistent with the two studies that have had the most impact on routine clinical practice in neuro-oncology. Of the seven metrics, surveyed clinicians considered patient outcomes and unmet need to be the most important when determining clinical trial value.

CONCLUSIONS

The metrics app was able to rank and produce a numerical 'value' for existing phase 3 neuro-oncology clinical trials. In the future, a related app to prospectively rank future trials at the startup stage could be developed to help centers determine which should be prioritized to be conducted at their site.

Evaluating risk of bias using ROBINS-I tool in nonrandomized studies of adjuvanted influenza vaccine

Seasonal variation in influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) makes real-world evidence (RWE) useful in supplementing the clinical-evidence base from randomized clinical trials. Adjuvanted inactivated influenza vaccine (aIIV) VE has been evaluated in multiple nonrandomized RWE studies. A systematic literature review of RWE studies evaluating the absolute or relative VE of aIIV was conducted. Identified studies were assessed by evaluators for risk of bias (RoB) by means of the ROBINS-I (Reduction of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions) tool to inform evidence-based medicine deliberations. Differences in evaluator assessments were resolved by consensus. The literature review yielded 14 follow-up studies, seven test-negative case-control (TNCC) studies, five traditional case-control studies, and one cluster-randomized clinical trial. Most follow-up studies and three TNCC studies were judged at low RoB. Issues increasing RoB included inadequate control of confounding, selection of controls, and reliance on recall of vaccination. The concerns identified in any of the designs could be mitigated with straightforward revisions to design or implementation. 17 of 27 nonrandomized studies of adjuvanted influenza-vaccine effectiveness, some from each of four study designs, were judged at low risk of material bias. These studies merit credence in assessing aIIV effectiveness relative to other influenza vaccines.

Heterogeneity of outcomes in randomized controlled trials on implant prosthodontic therapy is hindering comparative effectiveness research: meta-research study

BACKGROUND

Consistency in outcomes across clinical trials allows for comparing and combining results from different studies. A core outcome set (COS), representing a minimally agreed standardized group of outcomes that should be monitored and measured through research in a specific field of medicine, is not yet available for trials in implant prosthodontic (dental implant) therapy. This meta-research study aimed to analyze outcomes used in clinical trials on implant prosthodontic therapy.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group (COHG) register to identify systematic reviews of interventions in implant prosthodontic therapy published by October 2023. From the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included in the relevant reviews, we extracted data on the characteristics of the included trials and the outcomes used. We categorized outcomes into domains.

RESULTS

From 182 systematic reviews in the COHG register, we included 11 systematic reviews on dental implant therapy. The reviews included 117 unique RCTs with 4725 participants, published from 1995 to 2020, which analyzed 74 different outcomes. Using different definitions, implant failure was analyzed in 73 RCTs. Seventeen RCTs did not define implant failure. Failure was most often (30 RCTs) followed up for one year. Only one RCT assessed implant failure after five years. Trials used 17 definitions of implant failure, while 17 trials did not report on the criteria of implant failure. Complications were analyzed in 48 RCTs, although they were not clearly defined in 12 RCTs. Failure of prosthodontic supra-structure was analyzed in 74 RCTs, with definitions of failure and criteria not clearly defined in 44 RCTs. Trials considered adverse events, peri-implant tissue health, patient attitudes, and other outcomes, including cost, aesthetics, or procedure duration. These outcomes were often different between trials. Twenty-six outcomes were used only once per study.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical trials in implant prosthodontics used different outcomes, different definitions of outcomes and used different times to monitor them. Standardization of outcomes is necessary to allow comparability and evidence synthesis about the effectiveness of implant prosthodontic therapy.

Allosteric TYK2 inhibition: redefining autoimmune disease therapy beyond JAK1-3 inhibitors

JAK inhibitors impact multiple cytokine pathways simultaneously, enabling high efficacy in treating complex diseases such as cancers and immune-mediated disorders. However, their broad reach also poses safety concerns, which have fuelled a demand for increasingly selective JAK inhibitors. Deucravacitinib, a first-in-class allosteric TYK2 inhibitor, represents a remarkable advancement in the field. Rather than competing at kinase domain catalytic sites as classical JAK1-3 inhibitors, deucravacitinib targets the regulatory pseudokinase domain of TYK2. It strikingly mirrors the functional effect of an evolutionary conserved naturally occurring TYK2 variant, P1104A, known to protect against multiple autoimmune diseases yet provide sufficient TYK2-mediated cytokine signalling required to prevent immune deficiency. The unprecedentedly high functional selectivity and efficacy-safety profile of deucravacitinib, initially demonstrated in psoriasis, combined with genetic support, and promising outcomes in early SLE clinical trials make this inhibitor ripe for exploration in other autoimmune diseases for which better, safe, and efficacious treatments are urgently needed.

Patient family engagement and partnership: Pilot survey results in assessing behavior, communication, and quality of life in children with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome and other drug-resistant epilepsy

OBJECTIVES

Lennox-Gastaut Syndrome (LGS) and other drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) can impact behavior, communication, and quality of life (QoL). In collaboration with community engagement efforts with the Lennox-Gastaut Syndrome Foundation (LGSF), we aimed to gain an initial snapshot of patient and family perspectives and experiences with evaluation of behavior, communication, and QoL.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was conducted to collect self-reported information from caregivers of children with LGS and other DRE regarding their perspectives and experiences with healthcare providers' evaluation of behavior, communication, and QoL. The survey tool was developed by the study investigators in partnership with the LGS Foundation and had diffused to caregivers online by epilepsy advocacy groups including the Pediatric Epilepsy Surgery Alliance (PESA). Responses were analyzed. Descriptive statistics were calculated. The survey asked for caregiver perspectives and assessed which instruments the caregivers had previously been given for measuring these domains.

RESULTS

Responses from 245 caregivers were included, with 132 (54%) caregivers of an individual with LGS and 113 (46%) caregivers of an individual with non-LGS related DRE. Respondents reported that 66% of their loved ones had undergone epilepsy-related surgery. Over 90% agreed that measuring behavior, communication, and QoL was important, but fewer than half felt that their healthcare providers evaluated these domains well. LGS caregivers largely shared non-LGS caregivers' perspectives; however, they reported more frequently that communication was not evaluated enough. Barriers to measuring these domains included a lack of good surveys (developmentally appropriate and specific to the type of epilepsy) or not receiving any survey instruments for these domains during clinic appointments. Caregivers play a crucial role for individuals with DRE, and their input is essential in identifying challenges and needs. Caregivers believe that measuring behavior, communication, and quality of life is important, and most of them feel that their loved ones are not adequately evaluated during their healthcare encounters. There is a need for appropriately scaled survey instruments to measure areas of importance for patients and caregivers, as well as incorporation of these outcomes in the healthcare discussion.

Meaningful outcomes for children and their caregivers attending a paediatric brain centre

AIM

To identify meaningful outcomes of children and their caregivers attending a paediatric brain centre.

METHOD

We compiled a long list of outcomes of health and functioning of children with brain-related disorders such as cerebral palsy, spina bifida, (genetic) neurodevelopmental disorders, and acquired brain injury. We incorporated three perspectives: patients, health care professionals, and published outcome sets. An aggregated list was categorized using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health: Children and Youth version in a patient validation survey for children and parent-caregivers to prioritize outcomes. Outcomes were considered meaningful when ranked 'very important' by 70% or more of the participants.

RESULTS

We identified 104 outcomes from the three perspectives. After categorizing, 59 outcomes were included in the survey. Thirty-three surveys were completed by children (n = 4), caregivers (n = 24), and parent-caregivers together with their child (n = 5). Respondents prioritized 27 meaningful outcomes covering various aspects of health and functioning: emotional well-being, quality of life, mental and sensory functions, pain, physical health, and activities (communication, mobility, self-care, interpersonal relationships). Parent-caregiver concerns and environmental factors were newly identified outcomes.

INTERPRETATION

Children and parent-caregivers identified meaningful outcomes covering various aspects of health and functioning, including caregiver concerns and environmental factors. We propose including those in future outcome sets for children with neurodisability.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

Outcomes that children with brain-related disorders and their parent-caregivers consider to be the most meaningful cover a wide range of aspects of functioning. Involving these children and their parent-caregivers resulted in the identification of important outcomes that were not covered by professionals and the literature. Parent-caregiver-related factors (coping, burden of care) and environmental factors (support, attitudes, and [health care] services) were identified as meaningful.

Anti-seizure medications for neonates with seizures

BACKGROUND

Newborn infants are more prone to seizures than older children and adults. The neuronal injury caused by seizures in neonates often results in long-term neurodevelopmental sequelae. There are several options for anti-seizure medications (ASMs) in neonates. However, the ideal choice of first-, second- and third-line ASM is still unclear. Further, many other aspects of seizure management such as whether ASMs should be initiated for only-electrographic seizures and how long to continue the ASM once seizure control is achieved are elusive.

OBJECTIVES

1. To assess whether any ASM is more or less effective than an alternative ASM (both ASMs used as first-, second- or third-line treatment) in achieving seizure control and improving neurodevelopmental outcomes in neonates with seizures. We analysed EEG-confirmed seizures and clinically-diagnosed seizures separately. 2. To assess maintenance therapy with ASM versus no maintenance therapy after achieving seizure control. We analysed EEG-confirmed seizures and clinically-diagnosed seizures separately. 3. To assess treatment of both clinical and electrographic seizures versus treatment of clinical seizures alone in neonates.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, Epistemonikos and three databases in May 2022 and June 2023. These searches were not limited other than by study design to trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that included neonates with EEG-confirmed or clinically diagnosed seizures and compared (1) any ASM versus an alternative ASM, (2) maintenance therapy with ASM versus no maintenance therapy, and (3) treatment of clinical or EEG seizures versus treatment of clinical seizures alone.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed trial eligibility, risk of bias and independently extracted data. We analysed treatment effects in individual trials and reported risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data, and mean difference (MD) for continuous data, with respective 95% confidence interval (CI). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 18 trials (1342 infants) in this review. Phenobarbital versus levetiracetam as first-line ASM in EEG-confirmed neonatal seizures (one trial) Phenobarbital is probably more effective than levetiracetam in achieving seizure control after first loading dose (RR 2.32, 95% CI 1.63 to 3.30; 106 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and after maximal loading dose (RR 2.83, 95% CI 1.78 to 4.50; 106 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). However, we are uncertain about the effect of phenobarbital when compared to levetiracetam on mortality before discharge (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.52; 106 participants; very low-certainty evidence), requirement of mechanical ventilation (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.91; 106 participants; very low-certainty evidence), sedation/drowsiness (RR 1.74, 95% CI 0.68 to 4.44; 106 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and epilepsy post-discharge (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.76; 106 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The trial did not report on mortality or neurodevelopmental disability at 18 to 24 months. Phenobarbital versus phenytoin as first-line ASM in EEG-confirmed neonatal seizures (one trial) We are uncertain about the effect of phenobarbital versus phenytoin on achieving seizure control after maximal loading dose of ASM (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.72; 59 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The trial did not report on mortality or neurodevelopmental disability at 18 to 24 months. Maintenance therapy with ASM versus no maintenance therapy in clinically diagnosed neonatal seizures (two trials) We are uncertain about the effect of short-term maintenance therapy with ASM versus no maintenance therapy during the hospital stay (but discontinued before discharge) on the risk of repeat seizures before hospital discharge (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.01; 373 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Maintenance therapy with ASM compared to no maintenance therapy may have little or no effect on mortality before discharge (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.22; 373 participants; low-certainty evidence), mortality at 18 to 24 months (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.34 to 2.61; 111 participants; low-certainty evidence), neurodevelopmental disability at 18 to 24 months (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.13 to 6.12; 108 participants; low-certainty evidence) and epilepsy post-discharge (RR 3.18, 95% CI 0.69 to 14.72; 126 participants; low-certainty evidence). Treatment of both clinical and electrographic seizures versus treatment of clinical seizures alone in neonates (two trials) Treatment of both clinical and electrographic seizures when compared to treating clinical seizures alone may have little or no effect on seizure burden during hospitalisation (MD -1871.16, 95% CI -4525.05 to 782.73; 68 participants; low-certainty evidence), mortality before discharge (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.27; 68 participants; low-certainty evidence) and epilepsy post-discharge (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.12 to 4.73; 35 participants; low-certainty evidence). The trials did not report on mortality or neurodevelopmental disability at 18 to 24 months. We report data from the most important comparisons here; readers are directed to Results and Summary of Findings tables for all comparisons.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Phenobarbital as a first-line ASM is probably more effective than levetiracetam in achieving seizure control after the first loading dose and after the maximal loading dose of ASM (moderate-certainty evidence). Phenobarbital + bumetanide may have little or no difference in achieving seizure control when compared to phenobarbital alone (low-certainty evidence). Limited data and very low-certainty evidence preclude us from drawing any reasonable conclusion on the effect of using one ASM versus another on other short- and long-term outcomes. In neonates who achieve seizure control after the first loading dose of phenobarbital, maintenance therapy compared to no maintenance ASM may have little or no effect on all-cause mortality before discharge, mortality by 18 to 24 months, neurodevelopmental disability by 18 to 24 months and epilepsy post-discharge (low-certainty evidence). In neonates with hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy, treatment of both clinical and electrographic seizures when compared to treating clinical seizures alone may have little or no effect on seizure burden during hospitalisation, all-cause mortality before discharge and epilepsy post-discharge (low-certainty evidence). All findings of this review apply only to term and late preterm neonates. We need well-designed RCTs for each of the three objectives of this review to improve the precision of the results. These RCTs should use EEG to diagnose seizures and should be adequately powered to assess long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes. We need separate RCTs evaluating the choice of ASM in preterm infants.

iBehavior-a preliminary proof of concept study of a smartphone-based tool for the assessment of behavior change in neurodevelopmental disabilities

Purpose

The purpose of the present study was to describe the content and function of iBehavior, a smartphone-based caregiver-report electronic ecological momentary assessment (eEMA) tool developed to assess and track behavior change in people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDDs), and to examine its preliminary validity.

Methods

Ten parents of children (ages of 5-17 years) with IDDs (n = 7 with fragile X syndrome; n = 3 with Down syndrome) rated their child's behavior (aggression and irritability, avoidant and fearful behavior, restricted and repetitive behavior and interests, and social initiation) using iBehavior once daily for 14 days. At the conclusion of the 14-day observation period, parents completed traditional rating scales as validation measures, as well as a user feedback survey.

Results

Across the 140 possible observations, 8 were skipped, leading to a 94% response rate over 10 participants' observation periods. Participants also completed 100% of items for each of their logged observations. Parent ratings using iBehavior showed emerging evidence of convergent validity among domains with traditional rating scales including the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function 2 (BRIEF-2), and Aberrant Behavior Checklist-Community (ABC-C). iBehavior was feasible in the sample, and parent feedback indicated high overall satisfaction.

Conclusion

Results of the present pilot study indicate successful implementation and preliminary feasibility and validity of an eEMA tool for use as a behavioral outcome measure in IDDs.

Exploring the perspectives of selectors and collecters of trial outcome data: an international qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

Selecting and collecting data to support appropriate primary and secondary outcomes is a critical step in designing trials that can change clinical practice. In this study, we aimed to investigate who contributes to the process of selecting and collecting trial outcomes, and how these people are involved. This work serves two main purposes: (1) it provides the trials community with evidence to demonstrate how outcomes are currently selected and collected, and (2) it allows people involved in trial design and conduct to pick apart these processes to consider how efficiencies and improvements can be made.

METHODS

One-with-one semi-structured interviews, supported by a topic guide to ensure coverage of key content. The Framework approach was used for thematic analysis of data, and themes were linked through constant comparison of data both within and across participant groups. Interviews took place between July 2020 and January 2021. Participants were twenty-nine international trialists from various contributor groups, working primarily on designing and/or delivering phase III pragmatic effectiveness trials. Their experience spanned various funders, trial settings, clinical specialties, intervention types, and participant populations.

RESULTS

We identified three descriptive themes encompassing the process of primary and secondary outcome selection, collection, and the publication of outcome data. Within these themes, participants raised issues around the following: 1) Outcome selection: clarity of the research question; confidence in selecting trial outcomes and how confidence decreases with increased experience; interplay between different interested parties; how patients and the public are involved in outcome selection; perceived impact of poor outcome selection including poor recruitment and/or retention; and use of core outcome sets. 2) Outcome collection: disconnect between decisions made by outcome selectors and the practical work done by outcome collectors; potential impact of outcome measures on trial participants; potential impact on trial staff workload; and use of routinely collected data. 3) Publication of outcome data: difficulties in finding time to write and revise manuscripts for publication due to time and funding constraints. Participants overwhelmingly focused on the process of outcome selection, a topic they talked about unprompted. When prompted, participants do discuss outcome collection, but poor communication between selectors and collectors at the trial design stage means that outcome selection is rarely linked with the data collection workload it generates.

DISCUSSION

People involved in the design and conduct of trials fail to connect decisions around outcome selection with data collection workload. Publication of outcome data and effective dissemination of trial results are hindered due to the project-based culture of some academic clinical trial research.

Impact of surrogate outcomes in randomized controlled trials for shoulder rotator cuff tears

PURPOSE

Surrogate outcomes are clinical endpoints that are used as substitutes for direct measures of how a patient feels, functions, or survives. The present study aims to analyze the impact of surrogate outcomes on the results of randomized controlled trials on shoulder rotator cuff tears disorders.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to rotator cuff tear conditions published up until 2021 were retrieved from the PubMed and ACCESSSS databases. The primary outcome of the article was considered a surrogate outcome when the authors used radiological, physiologic, or functional variables. The result of the article was considered positive when results supported the intervention based on the trial's primary outcome. We recorded the sample size, the mean follow-up, and the type of funding. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 112 papers were included in the analysis. The mean sample size was 87.6 patients; mean follow-up period was 25.97 months. Thirty-six out of 112 RCTs used a surrogate outcome as a primary endpoint. More than half of papers using surrogate outcomes reported a positive finding (20 out of 36), while 10 out of 71 RCTs using patient-centered outcomes favored the intervention (14.08%, p < 0.001) [RR = 3.94 (95% CI 2.07-7.51)]. The mean sample size was smaller in trials using surrogate endpoints (75.11 vs 92.35 patients, respectively, p = 0.049), while the follow-up was shorter (14.12 m vs. 31.9 m, p < 0.001). Approximately 25% of the papers that reported surrogate endpoints (22.58%) were industry-funded projects.

CONCLUSIONS

The substitution of surrogate endpoints for patient-important outcomes in shoulder rotator cuff trials quadruplicates the chances of obtaining a favorable result that favors the analyzed intervention.

Treatment of seizures in the neonate: Guidelines and consensus-based recommendations-Special report from the ILAE Task Force on Neonatal Seizures

Seizures are common in neonates, but there is substantial management variability. The Neonatal Task Force of the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) developed evidence-based recommendations about antiseizure medication (ASM) management in neonates in accordance with ILAE standards. Six priority questions were formulated, a systematic literature review and meta-analysis were performed, and results were reported following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 standards. Bias was evaluated using the Cochrane tool and risk of Bias in non-randomised studies - of interventions (ROBINS-I), and quality of evidence was evaluated using grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE). If insufficient evidence was available, then expert opinion was sought using Delphi consensus methodology. The strength of recommendations was defined according to the ILAE Clinical Practice Guidelines development tool. There were six main recommendations. First, phenobarbital should be the first-line ASM (evidence-based recommendation) regardless of etiology (expert agreement), unless channelopathy is likely the cause for seizures (e.g., due to family history), in which case phenytoin or carbamazepine should be used. Second, among neonates with seizures not responding to first-line ASM, phenytoin, levetiracetam, midazolam, or lidocaine may be used as a second-line ASM (expert agreement). In neonates with cardiac disorders, levetiracetam may be the preferred second-line ASM (expert agreement). Third, following cessation of acute provoked seizures without evidence for neonatal-onset epilepsy, ASMs should be discontinued before discharge home, regardless of magnetic resonance imaging or electroencephalographic findings (expert agreement). Fourth, therapeutic hypothermia may reduce seizure burden in neonates with hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (evidence-based recommendation). Fifth, treating neonatal seizures (including electrographic-only seizures) to achieve a lower seizure burden may be associated with improved outcome (expert agreement). Sixth, a trial of pyridoxine may be attempted in neonates presenting with clinical features of vitamin B6-dependent epilepsy and seizures unresponsive to second-line ASM (expert agreement). Additional considerations include a standardized pathway for the management of neonatal seizures in each neonatal unit and informing parents/guardians about the diagnosis of seizures and initial treatment options.

Beyond Participation: Evaluating the Role of Patients in Designing Oncology Clinical Trials

Historically, subject matter experts and healthcare professionals have played a pivotal role in driving oncology clinical trials. Although patients have been key participants, their deliberate and active contribution to the design and decision-making process has been limited. This scoping review aimed to examine the existing literature to scope the extent of active patient engagement in the design of oncology clinical trials and its corresponding influence on trial outcomes. We conducted a systematic search using two databases, namely MEDLINE (Ovid) and EMBASE, to identify relevant studies exploring patient engagement in cancer-related clinical research design. We identified seven studies that met the eligibility criteria. The studies highlighted the benefits of active patient involvement, such as improved recruitment strategies, and the attainment of more patient-centered trial outcomes. The influence of patient involvement varied from tangible developments like patient-friendly resources to indirect impacts like improved patient experiences and potentially higher adherence to trial intervention. The future of clinical trials should prioritize patients' values and perspectives, with regulatory bodies fostering these practices through clear guidelines. As the concept of patient centricity takes root in oncology research, the involvement of patients should evolve beyond mere participation.

EVALUATION OF OUTCOMES IN INTERVENTION RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIALS - DISTAL RADIUS FRACTURES

Objectives

Describe the frequency and types of outcomes in randomized clinical trials (RCT) of intervention for distal radius fractures, analyze how confusing outcome presentations can lead to misinterpretations, and suggest strategies to improve the reader's understanding of the decision-making process.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted through a systematized search on the PubMed® database in the last 10 years, in which only intervention RCT was included for distal radius fractures, and outcomes were analyzed.

Results

Of the primary outcomes analyzed in the 75 selected articles, 46.6% were classified as clinical outcomes, 20% as surrogate, 30.6% as composite, 1.3% as complex scales, and 1.3% as safety outcomes. 34.7% of the articles did not report adverse events.

Conclusion

The presentation of outcomes with little clinical relevance represented more than half of the sample (53.4%) - such studies can harm the reader since they confuse the interpretation of scientific evidence; the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative could help health professionals in understanding and selecting the most appropriate therapeutic interventions for patients. Level of Evidence III; Retrospective comparative study .

Strengthening Reporting of Neonatal Trials

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

There is variability in the selection and reporting of outcomes in neonatal trials with key information frequently omitted. This can impact applicability of trial findings to clinicians, families, and caregivers, and impair evidence synthesis. The Neonatal Core Outcomes Set describes outcomes agreed as clinically important that should be assessed in all neonatal trials, and Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT)-Outcomes 2022 is a new, harmonized, evidence-based reporting guideline for trial outcomes. We reviewed published trials using CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 guidance to identify exemplars of neonatal core outcome reporting to strengthen description of outcomes in future trial publications.

METHODS

Neonatal trials including >100 participants per arm published between 2015 to 2020 with a primary outcome included in the Neonatal Core Outcome Set were identified. Primary outcome reporting was reviewed using CONSORT 2010 and CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 guidelines by assessors recruited from Cochrane Neonatal. Examples of clear and complete outcome reporting were identified with verbatim text extracted from trial reports.

RESULTS

Thirty-six trials were reviewed by 39 assessors. Examples of good reporting for CONSORT 2010 and CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 criteria were identified and subdivided into 3 outcome categories: "survival," "short-term neonatal complications," and "long-term developmental outcomes" depending on the core outcomes to which they relate. These examples are presented to strengthen future research reporting.

CONCLUSIONS

We have identified examples of good trial outcome reporting. These illustrate how important neonatal outcomes should be reported to meet the CONSORT 2010 and CONSORT-Outcomes 2022 guidelines. Emulating these examples will improve the transmission of information relating to outcomes and reduce associated research waste.

Eos and OMOCL: Towards a seamless integration of openEHR records into the OMOP Common Data Model

BACKGROUND

The reuse of data from electronic health records (EHRs) for research purposes promises to improve the data foundation for clinical trials and may even support to enable them. Nevertheless, EHRs are characterized by both, heterogeneous structure and semantics. To standardize this data for research, the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) Common Data Model (CDM) standard has recently seen an increase in use. However, the conversion of these EHRs into the OMOP CDM requires complex and resource intensive Extract Transform and Load (ETL) processes. This hampers the reuse of clinical data for research. To solve the issues of heterogeneity of EHRs and the lack of semantic precision on the care site, the openEHR standard has recently seen wider adoption. A standardized process to integrate openEHR records into the CDM potentially lowers the barriers of making EHRs accessible for research. Yet, a comprehensive approach about the integration of openEHR records into the OMOP CDM has not yet been made.

METHODS

We analyzed both standards and compared their models to identify possible mappings. Based on this, we defined the necessary processes to transform openEHR records into CDM tables. We also discuss the limitation of openEHR with its unspecific demographics model and propose two possible solutions.

RESULTS

We developed the OMOP Conversion Language (OMOCL) which enabled us to define a declarative openEHR archetype-to-CDM mapping language. Using OMOCL, it was possible to define a set of mappings. As a proof-of-concept, we implemented the Eos tool, which uses the OMOCL-files to successfully automatize the ETL from real-world and sample EHRs into the OMOP CDM.

DISCUSSION

Both Eos and OMOCL provide a way to define generic mappings for an integration of openEHR records into OMOP. Thus, it represents a significant step towards achieving interoperability between the clinical and the research data domains. However, the transformation of openEHR data into the less expressive OMOP CDM leads to a loss of semantics.

Assessment of Symptoms and Adverse Events Related to Immunotherapy in Patients With Cancer: An Integrative Review

CONTEXT

Clinical practice guidelines advocate for routine assessment of symptoms and adverse events during immunotherapy treatment of cancer. Outside the clinical trial setting, there are few examples of such assessment in practice.

OBJECTIVES

To identify, appraise, and synthesize the available literature regarding the assessment of immune-related symptoms and adverse events in patients with cancer beyond the clinical trial setting. Specifically, we aimed to identify the measurement instruments used, who completes these and when.

METHODS

We completed an integrative review following established methods including a systematic literature search of electronic databases, a dual process for screening, quality appraisal, and data extraction. We included primary studies (retrospective or prospective) reporting the use of instruments or strategies to assess symptoms or adverse events in patients with cancer treated with immunotherapy. Outcomes of interest included: 1) how immune-related symptoms and adverse events were assessed; 2) types of assessment instruments; 3) frequency of instrument use and mode of administration; 4) the reported duration and intensity of symptoms and 5) adverse events and associated management strategies. Data were synthesized narratively.

RESULTS

We screened 2138 articles and included 16 articles representing 2553 patients with cancer undergoing immunotherapy. All articles were published between 2018 and 2022 and were of sound methodological quality. Seven studies were retrospective chart reviews, and the remaining studies prospectively collected data, with seven collecting patient reported outcomes. In studies where data were collected at more than one time point (n = 6), weekly assessment during immunotherapy was the most common frequency. The potential for implementation of assessment into routine clinical practice was described in just four studies.

CONCLUSION

Despite recommendations from clinical practice guidelines for routine assessment of symptoms and adverse events during immunotherapy treatment for cancer, there are few examples of how this is undertaken in clinical practice. The use of patient reported outcome measures to assess toxicity from immunotherapy is uncommon but offers the potential to identify symptoms early and facilitate timely intervention. Our review highlights the available instruments, how they have been used and the need for more applied research in this field to optimize patient outcomes.

Survival After Implementation of a Decision Support Tool to Facilitate Evidence-Based Cancer Treatment

PURPOSE

Decision support tools (DSTs) to facilitate evidence-based cancer treatment are increasingly common in care delivery organizations. Implementation of these tools may improve process outcomes, but little is known about effects on patient outcomes such as survival. We aimed to evaluate the effect of implementing a DST for cancer treatment on overall survival (OS) among patients with breast, colorectal, and lung cancer.

METHODS

We used institutional cancer registry data to identify adults treated for first primary breast, colorectal, or lung cancer between December 2013 and December 2017. Our intervention of interest was implementation of a commercial DST for cancer treatment, and outcome of interest was OS. We emulated a single-arm trial with historical comparison and used a flexible parametric model to estimate standardized 3-year restricted mean survival time (RMST) difference and mortality risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence limits (CLs).

RESULTS

Our study population comprised 1,059 patients with cancer (323 breast, 318 colorectal, and 418 lung). Depending on cancer type, median age was 55-60 years, 45%-67% were racial/ethnic minorities, and 49%-69% were uninsured. DST implementation had little effect on survival at 3 years. The largest effect was observed among patients with lung cancer (RMST difference, 1.7 months; 95% CL, -0.26 to 3.7; mortality RR, 0.95; 95% CL, 0.88 to 1.0). Adherence with tool-based treatment recommendations was >70% before and >90% across cancers.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that implementation of a DST for cancer treatment has nominal effect on OS, which may be partially attributable to high adherence with evidence-based treatment recommendations before tool implementation in our setting. Our results raise awareness that improved process outcomes may not translate to improved patient outcomes in some care delivery settings.

How to reach agreement: the impact of different analytical approaches to Delphi process results in core outcomes set development

BACKGROUND

Core outcomes sets are increasingly used to define research outcomes that are most important for a condition. Different consensus methods are used in the development of core outcomes sets; the most common is the Delphi process. Delphi methodology is increasingly standardised for core outcomes set development, but uncertainties remain. We aimed to empirically test how the use of different summary statistics and consensus criteria impact Delphi process results.

METHODS

Results from two unrelated child health Delphi processes were analysed. Outcomes were ranked by mean, median, or rate of exceedance, and then pairwise comparisons were undertaken to analyse whether the rankings were similar. The correlation coefficient for each comparison was calculated, and Bland-Altman plots produced. Youden's index was used to assess how well the outcomes ranked highest by each summary statistic matched the final core outcomes sets. Consensus criteria identified in a review of published Delphi processes were applied to the results of the two child-health Delphi processes. The size of the consensus sets produced by different criteria was compared, and Youden's index was used to assess how well the outcomes that met different criteria matched the final core outcomes sets.

RESULTS

Pairwise comparisons of different summary statistics produced similar correlation coefficients. Bland-Altman plots showed that comparisons involving ranked medians had wider variation in the ranking. No difference in Youden's index for the summary statistics was found. Different consensus criteria produced widely different sets of consensus outcomes (range: 5-44 included outcomes). They also showed differing abilities to identify core outcomes (Youden's index range: 0.32-0.92). The choice of consensus criteria had a large impact on Delphi results.

DISCUSSION

The use of different summary statistics is unlikely to affect how outcomes are ranked during a Delphi process: mean, median, and rates of exceedance produce similar results. Different consensus criteria have a large impact on resultant consensus outcomes and potentially on subsequent core outcomes sets: our results confirm the importance of adhering to pre-specified consensus criteria.

Comment on Topical Dapsone for Folliculitis Decalvans

Folliculitis decalvans (FD) represents a chronic and recurrent pustulofollicular scalp inflammation resulting in scarring alopecia. The presence of a bacterial bioflilm at the interface of the hair shaft may provide an explanation for the chronicity and high relapse rate of FD, even after prolonged systemic antibiotic treatments. We originally read with enthusiasm Melián-Olivera et al.'s retrospective study of patients with FD treated with topical dapsone published in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. However, we experienced an unsuccessful trial of 5% dapsone gel in a patient with FD resulting in worsening of the disease with a pustular flareup and questioned why positive study reports with novel therapeutic options in dermatology often fail in practice. The authors admitted the limitations of their study: small sample size, retrospective, uncontrolled nature of the study, and concomitant use of other treatments. Clinical research ultimately aims at improving the patient outcome. For this purpose, trials must evaluate the outcomes that genuinely reflect the clinical utility of drugs. Therefore, we postulate stricter criteria for treatment trials and statistics in dermatology before publication in peer-reviewed scientific journals to avoid frustrations of physicians and patients alike.

COPD exacerbations and patient-reported outcomes according to post-bronchodilator FEV1 - a post-hoc analysis of pooled data

BACKGROUND

Management strategies of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) need to be tailored to the forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁₎, exacerbations, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of individual patients. In this study, we analyzed the association and correlation between the FEV₁, exacerbations, and PROs of patients with stable COPD.

METHODS

This was a post-hoc analysis of pooled data from two cross-sectional studies that were previously conducted in Malaysia from 2017 to 2019, the results of which had been published separately. The parameters measured included post-bronchodilator FEV₁ (PB-FEV₁), exacerbations, and scores of modified Medical Research Council (mMRC), COPD Assessment Test (CAT), and St George's Respiratory Questionnaire for COPD (SGRQ-c). Descriptive, association, and correlation statistics were used.

RESULTS

Three hundred seventy-four patients were included in the analysis. The PB-FEV₁ predicted was < 30% in 85 (22.7%), 30-49% in 142 (38.0%), 50-79% in 111 (29.7%), and ≥ 80% in 36 (9.6%) patients. Patients with PB-FEV₁ < 30% predicted had significantly more COPD exacerbations than those with PB-FEV₁ 30-49% predicted (p < 0.001), 50-79% predicted (p < 0.001), and ≥ 80% predicted (p = 0.002). The scores of mMRC, CAT, and SGRQ-c were not significantly higher in patients with more severe airflow limitation based on PB-FEV₁ (p = 0.121-0.271). The PB-FEV₁ predicted had significant weak negative correlations with exacerbations (r = - 0.182, p < 0.001), mMRC (r = - 0.121, p = 0.020), and SGRQ-c scores (r = - 0.114, p = 0.028). There was a moderate positive correlation between COPD exacerbations and scores of mMRC, CAT, and SGRQ-c (r = 0.407-0.482, all p < 0.001). There were significant strong positive correlations between mMRC score with CAT (r = 0.727) and SGRQ-c scores (r = 0.847), and CAT score with SGRQ-c score (r = 0.851) (all p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In COPD patients, different severity of airflow limitation was not associated with significant differences in the mMRC, CAT, and SGRQ-c scores. Exacerbations were significantly more frequent in patients with very severe airflow limitation only. The correlation between airflow limitation with exacerbations, mMRC, and SGRQ-c was weak.

iBehavior - A Smartphone-Based Ecological Momentary Assessment Tool for the Assessment of Behavior Change in Neurodevelopmental Disorders

The purpose of the present study was to describe the content and function of iBehavior, a smartphone-based caregiver-report electronic ecological momentary assessment (eEMA) tool developed to assess and track behavior change in people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDDs), and to examine its preliminary validity. Ten parents of children (ages of 5-17 years) with IDDs (n = 7 with fragile X syndrome; n = 3 with Down syndrome) rated their child's behavior (aggression and irritability, avoidant and fearful behavior, restricted and repetitive behavior and interests, and social initiation) using iBehavior once daily for 14 days. At the conclusion of the 14-day observation period, parents completed traditional rating scales as validation measures, as well as a user feedback survey. Parent ratings using iBehavior showed emerging evidence of convergent validity among domains with traditional rating scales including the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function 2 (BRIEF-2), Aberrant Behavior Checklist - Community (ABC-C), and Conners 3. iBehavior was feasible in our sample, and parent feedback indicated high overall satisfaction. Results of the present pilot study indicate successful implementation and preliminary feasibility and validity of an eEMA tool for use as a behavioral outcome measure in IDDs.

Changes in body weight and cardiovascular risk factors in a Chinese population with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a longitudinal study

Introduction

The primary care management of blood glucose, blood pressure, lipid profiles, and body weight is important among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) to prevent disease progression. Information on how weight changes would improve or deteriorate cardiovascular (CV) risk factors is warranted for making primary care recommendations. We aimed to investigate the changes in body weight and CV risk factors and to analyse their association in a Chinese population with T2DM.

Methods

We retrieved longitudinal data between 2020 and 2021 from 1,758 adult primary care patients enrolled in a diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening programme. Linear associations of changes in body weight with CV risk factors were explored. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to examine associations between different weight change categories and the worsening of CV risk factors.

Results

The mean age of all the participants was 63.71 years, and over half of participants were females. During a one-year follow-up period, 24.7% of patients had a weight loss of ≥3%, while 22.2% of patients had a weight gain of ≥3%. Patients who had a weight loss of ≥3% were more likely to prevent the worsening of haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and triglycerides, while those who had a weight gain of ≥3% tended to have worsened HbA1c, lipid profiles, and blood pressure.

Conclusion

Results from this real-world investigation suggested the concurrent need for weight loss intervention among patients who are overweight or obese and weight gain prevention among patients whose body weight falls within the normal range in the context of community-based diabetes management.

Specific recommendations to improve the design and conduct of clinical trials

There are many reasons why the majority of clinical trials fail or have limited applicability to patient care. These include restrictive entry criteria, short duration studies, unrecognized adverse drug effects, and reporting of therapy assignment preferential to actual use. Frequently, experimental animal models are used sparingly and do not accurately simulate human disease. We suggest two approaches to improve the conduct, increase the success, and applicability of clinical trials. Studies can apply dosing of the investigational therapeutics and outcomes, determined from animal models that more closely simulate human disease. More extensive identification of known and potential risk factors and confounding issues, gleaned from recently organized "big data," should be utilized to create models for trials. The risk factors in each model are then accounted for and managed during each study.

Prospective evaluation of 24-hour movement behaviors among adolescents recovering from a sport-related concussion

This study aimed to describe the 24-hour composition of movement behaviors, including sleep, sedentary behavior, and physical activity (PA), among pediatric sports-related concussion (SRC) patients over their recovery period, assess the association between movement compositions and recovery time, and understand feasibility of 24-hour accelerometry in the study population. A cohort of 50 pediatric SRC patients were asked to wear a wrist-worn accelerometer continuously for the duration of their recovery. Among all enrolled participants, the sample was primarily 14 or 15 years of age (65%), female (55%), and recovered in under 28 days (88%). Accelerometer compliance was moderate; 35 participants (70%) were compliant with the protocol. Compositional analysis was used to address time-use objectives in 33 participants who provided adequate data for inclusion. Overall, participants spent an average of 50% of their 24-hour day sedentary, 33% sleeping, 11% in light intensity PA, and 6% in moderate or vigorous intensity PA. The 24-hour composition of movement behaviors was not associated with recovery time (p = .09-.99). However, the limited sample size may have contributed to null findings. Given recent evidence supporting the effects of sedentary behavior and PA on concussion recovery, future studies should aim to further validate these findings in a larger sample.

Agents contributing to secondary immunodeficiency development in patients with multiple myeloma, chronic lymphocytic leukemia and non-Hodgkin lymphoma: A systematic literature review

Introduction

Patients with hematological malignancies (HMs), like chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), multiple myeloma (MM), and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), have a high risk of secondary immunodeficiency (SID), SID-related infections, and mortality. Here, we report the results of a systematic literature review on the potential association of various cancer regimens with infection rates, neutropenia, lymphocytopenia, or hypogammaglobulinemia, indicative of SID.

Methods

A systematic literature search was performed in 03/2022 using PubMed to search for clinical trials that mentioned in the title and/or abstract selected cancer (CLL, MM, or NHL) treatments covering 12 classes of drugs, including B-lineage monoclonal antibodies, CAR T therapies, proteasome inhibitors, kinase inhibitors, immunomodulators, antimetabolites, anti-tumor antibiotics, alkylating agents, Bcl-2 antagonists, histone deacetylase inhibitors, vinca alkaloids, and selective inhibitors of nuclear export. To be included, a publication had to report at least one of the following: percentages of patients with any grade and/or grade ≥3 infections, any grade and/or grade ≥3 neutropenia, or hypogammaglobulinemia. From the relevant publications, the percentages of patients with lymphocytopenia and specific types of infection (fungal, viral, bacterial, respiratory [upper or lower respiratory tract], bronchitis, pneumonia, urinary tract infection, skin, gastrointestinal, and sepsis) were collected.

Results

Of 89 relevant studies, 17, 38, and 34 included patients with CLL, MM, and NHL, respectively. In CLL, MM, and NHL, any grade infections were seen in 51.3%, 35.9% and 31.1% of patients, and any grade neutropenia in 36.3%, 36.4%, and 35.4% of patients, respectively. The highest proportion of patients with grade ≥3 infections across classes of drugs were: 41.0% in patients with MM treated with a B-lineage monoclonal antibody combination; and 29.9% and 38.0% of patients with CLL and NHL treated with a kinase inhibitor combination, respectively. In the limited studies, the mean percentage of patients with lymphocytopenia was 1.9%, 11.9%, and 38.6% in CLL, MM, and NHL, respectively. Two studies reported the proportion of patients with hypogammaglobulinemia: 0-15.3% in CLL and 5.9% in NHL (no studies reported hypogammaglobulinemia in MM).

Conclusion

This review highlights cancer treatments contributing to infections and neutropenia, potentially related to SID, and shows underreporting of hypogammaglobulinemia and lymphocytopenia before and during HM therapies.

Factors Influencing Community Participation in Internet Interventions Compared With Research Trials: Observational Study in a Nationally Representative Adult Cohort

BACKGROUND

Digital mental health (DMH) programs can be effective in treating and preventing mental health problems. However, community engagement with these programs can be poor. Understanding the barriers and enablers of DMH program use may assist in identifying ways to increase the uptake of these programs, which have the potential to provide broad-scale prevention and treatment in the community.

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we aimed to identify and compare factors that may influence participation in DMH programs in practice and research trials, identify any respondent characteristics that are associated with these factors, and assess the relationship between intentions to use DMH programs and actual uptake.

METHODS

Australian adults aged ≥18 years were recruited from market research panels to participate in the study. The sample was representative of the Australian adult population based on age, gender, and location. Participants completed a cross-sectional web-based survey assessing demographic characteristics, mental health symptom measures, attitudes and use of DMH programs in practice and in research studies, and the factors influencing their use in both settings.

RESULTS

Across both research and practice, trust in the organization delivering the service or trial was the top-ranked factor influencing participation, followed by anonymity or privacy and adequate information. There was little variation in rankings across demographic groups, including intentions to use DMH programs or mental health status. Intentions to use DMH programs were a strong predictor of both current (odds ratio 2.50, 99% CI 1.41-4.43; P<.001) and past (odds ratio 2.98, 99% CI 1.71-5.19; P<.001) use behaviors.

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts to increase the uptake of DMH programs or participation in research trials should focus on clearly communicating the following to users: the legitimacy of the organization delivering the program, security and use of participant data, and effectiveness of DMH programs.

Matching the Outcomes to Treatment Targets of Exercise for Low Back Pain: Does it Make a Difference? Results of Secondary Analyses From Individual Patient Data of Randomised Controlled Trials and Pooling of Results Across Trials in Comparative Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To explore whether using a single matched or composite outcome might affect the results of previous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing exercise for non-specific low back pain (NSLBP). The first objective was to explore whether a single matched outcome generated greater standardized mean differences (SMDs) when compared with the original unmatched primary outcome SMD. The second objective was to explore whether a composite measure, composed of matched outcomes, generated a greater SMD when compared with the original primary outcome SMD.

DESIGN

We conducted exploratory secondary analyses of data.

SETTING

Seven RCTs were included, of which 2 were based in the USA (University research clinic, Veterans Affairs medical center) and the UK (primary care clinics, nonmedical centers). One each were based in Norway (clinics), Brazil (primary care), and Japan (outpatient clinics).

PARTICIPANTS

The first analysis comprised 1) 5 RCTs (n=1033) that used an unmatched primary outcome but included (some) matched outcomes as secondary outcomes, and the second analysis comprised 2) 4 RCTs (n=864) that included multiple matched outcomes by developing composite outcomes (N=1897).

INTERVENTION

Exercise compared with no exercise.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The composite consisted of standardized averaged matched outcomes. All analyses replicated the RCTs' primary outcome analyses.

RESULTS

Of 5 RCTs, 3 had greater SMDs with matched outcomes (pooled effect SMD 0.30 [95% confidence interval {CI} 0.04, 0.56], P=.02) compared with an unmatched primary outcome (pooled effect SMD 0.19 [95% CI -0.03, 0.40] P=.09). Of 4 composite outcome analyses, 3 RCTs had greater SMDs in the composite outcome (pooled effect SMD 0.28 [95% CI 0.05, 0.51] P=.02) compared with the primary outcome (pooled effect SMD 0.24 [95% CI -0.04, 0.53] P=.10).

CONCLUSIONS

These exploratory analyses suggest that using an outcome matched to exercise treatment targets in NSLBP RCTs may produce greater SMDs than an unmatched primary outcome. Composite outcomes could offer a meaningful way of investigating superiority of exercise than single domain outcomes.

The Draft Report by the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Healthcare Does Not Provide Any Evidence That Graded Exercise Therapy and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Are Safe and Effective Treatments for Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

The German Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Healthcare (IQWiG) recently published its draft report to the government about myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). The IQWiG concluded that graded exercise therapy (GET) and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) should be recommended in the treatment for mild and moderate ME/CFS based on two CBT and two GET studies. In this article, we reviewed the evidence used by IQWiG to support their claims, because their conclusion is diametrically opposed to the conclusion by the British National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in its recently updated ME/CFS guidelines. Our analysis shows that the trials IQWiG used in support suffered from serious flaws, which included badly designed control groups; relying on subjective primary outcomes in non-blinded studies; alliance and response shift bias, including patients in their trials who did not have the disease under investigation, selective reporting, making extensive endpoint changes and low to very low adherence of treatments. Our analysis also shows that the report itself used one CBT and one GET study that both examined a different treatment. The report also used a definition of CBT that does not reflect the way it is being used in ME/CFS or was tested in the studies. The report noted that one study used a wrong definition of post-exertional malaise (PEM), the main characteristic of the disease, according to the report. Yet, it ignored the consequence of this, that less than the required minimum percentage of patients had the disease under investigation in that study. It also ignored the absence of improvement on most of the subjective outcomes, as well as the fact that the IQWiG methods handbook states that one should use objective outcomes and not rely on subjective outcomes in non-blinded studies. The report concluded that both treatments did not lead to objective improvement in the six-minute walk test but then ignored that. The report did not analyze the other objective outcomes of the studies (step test and occupational and benefits status), which showed a null effect. Finally, the report states that the studies do not report on safety yet assumes that the treatments are safe based on a tendency towards small subjective improvements in fatigue and physical functioning, even though the adherence to the treatments was (very) low and the studies included many patients who did not have the disease under investigation and, consequently, did not suffer from exertion intolerance contrary to ME/CFS patients. At the same time, it ignored and downplayed all the evidence that both treatments are not safe, even when the evidence was produced by a British university. In conclusion, the studies used by the report do not provide any evidence that CBT and GET are safe and effective. Consequently, the report and the studies do not provide any support for the recommendation to use CBT and GET for ME/CFS or long COVID, which, in many cases, is the same or resembles ME/CFS, after an infection with SARS-CoV-2.

The 2022 Ferno Award Address: CrEATE, an Efficient Crossover Evaluation of Addiction Treatment Efficacy

Dozens of drugs have been evaluated in recent decades for initial evidence of efficacy to aid smoking cessation (i.e. "early Phase 2" testing, according to U.S. FDA terminology), with the vast majority failing to show efficacy. Even small randomized clinical trials (RCTs), the most common early Phase 2 tests, are costly undertakings, made more unappealing by their high likelihood of failure. At the same time, another early Phase 2 approach, acute tests of drug effects on surrogate endpoints such as withdrawal or craving severity, are more practical but have little predictive clinical validity. Described here is an innovative procedure that optimally combines the validity of clinical trials with the practical advantages of surrogate endpoint studies to more efficiently determine whether or not a novel drug warrants continued clinical development. This CrEATE procedure, or Crossover Evaluation of Addiction Treatment Efficacy, does so by assessing short-term quit success in smokers highly motivated to quit when briefly treated with active drug versus placebo in a crossover design, so that quit efficacy from both conditions is compared within participants. The program to develop and evaluate CrEATE demonstrates its sensitivity to efficacy from all three FDA-approved first-line cessation medications (NRT, varenicline, bupropion), tested here as model drugs, as well as specificity in identifying lack of efficacy with a drug known to be ineffective for cessation (modafinil). CrEATE has subsequently been used to evaluate a few novel interventions, concluding they lack efficacy in increasing quit success. Future directions for the potential utility of CrEATE are provided. Implications: The ability of CrEATE to reach a Go/No Go decision more quickly and with far less cost lowers the risk of failure, meaning widespread use of the procedure should encourage the evaluation of more novel candidate drugs. With its greater efficiency, failed tests, unfortunately the most likely outcome in early Phase 2 studies, will cause less waste of resources. At the same time, CrEATE tests that indicate a novel treatment has efficacy will justify the substantial time and expense of moving forward to evaluate the drug in late Phase 2 RCTs.

A good use of time? Providing evidence for how effort is invested in primary and secondary outcome data collection in trials

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

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

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

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.

Diet-Related and Gut-Derived Metabolites and Health Outcomes: A Scoping Review

We conducted a scoping review to map available evidence about the health impact of gut microbiota-derived metabolites. We searched PubMed and Embase for studies that assessed the health impact of ten metabolites on any health condition: deoxycholate or deoxycholic acid (DCA), lithocholate or lithocholic acid (LCA), glycolithocholate or glycolithocholic acid, glycodeoxycholate or glycodeoxycholic acid, tryptamine, putrescine, d-alanine, urolithins, N-acetylmannosamine, and phenylacetylglutamine. We identified 352 eligible studies with 168,072 participants. Most (326, 92.6%) were case-control studies, followed by cohort studies (14, 4.0%), clinical trials (8, 2.3%), and cross-sectional studies (6, 1.7%). Most studies assessed the following associations: DCA on hepatobiliary disorders (64 studies, 7976 participants), colorectal cancer (19 studies, 7461 participants), and other digestive disorders (27 studies, 2463 participants); LCA on hepatobiliary disorders (34 studies, 4297 participants), colorectal cancers (14 studies, 4955 participants), and other digestive disorders (26 studies, 2117 participants); putrescine on colorectal cancers (16 studies, 94,399 participants) and cancers excluding colorectal and hepatobiliary cancers (42 studies, 4250 participants). There is a need to conduct more prospective studies, including clinical trials. Moreover, we identified metabolites and conditions for which systemic reviews are warranted to characterize the direction and magnitude of metabolite-disease associations.

Prioritizing outcome measures after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: A q-sort survey of patients, health care providers and researchers

Objective

To understand which outcome measures patients and their families, health care providers, and researchers prioritize after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH).

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional q-sort survey with participants from three key stakeholder groups. Potential outcomes were identified from interviews and focus groups. Participants were purposively sampled to achieve diversity based on stakeholder group, geography, and profession. Respondents sorted 27 outcomes in a quasi-normally distributed grid (Q-Sort) from most to least important. Principal components analysis was used to determine similarities in the way participants sorted the outcome measures resulting in distinct groupings. Overall rankings were also reported.

Results

112 participants were invited. 70 responded and 64 participants from 25 different countries completed a Q-sort. Balanced stakeholder representation was achieved. Five distinct patterns were identified based on survival, pathophysiological, psychological, resource use, and functional outcome measures. Quality of life as reported by the patient was the highest ranked outcome measure followed by independence and functional measures. Survival and biomedical outcomes were ranked in the middle and cost measures last.

Conclusions

In this diverse sample of key stakeholders, we characterized several distinct perspectives with respect to outcome measure selection in aSAH. We did not identify a clear pattern of opinion based on stakeholder group or other participant characteristics. Patient-reported measure of quality of life was ranked the most important overall with function and independence also highly rated. These results will assist study design and inform efforts to improve outcome selection in aSAH research.

Facilitating future implementation and translation to clinical practice: The Implementation Planning Assessment Tool for clinical trials

Implementation assessment plans are crucial for clinical trials to achieve their full potential. Without a proactive plan to implement trial results, it can take decades for one-fifth of effective interventions to be adopted into routine care settings. The Veterans Health Administration Office of Research and Development is undergoing a systematic transformation to embed implementation planning in research protocols through the Cooperative Studies Program, its flagship clinical research program. This manuscript has two objectives: 1) to introduce an Implementation Planning Assessment (IPA) Tool that any clinical trialist may use to facilitate post-trial implementation of interventions found to be effective and 2) to provide a case study demonstrating the IPA Tool's use. The IPA Tool encourages study designers to initially consider rigorous data collection to maximize acceptability of the intervention by end-users. It also helps identify and prepare potential interested parties at local and national leadership levels to ensure, upon trial completion, interventions can be integrated into programs, technologies, and policies in a sustainable way. The IPA Tool can alleviate some of the overwhelming nature of implementation science by providing a practical guide based on implementation science principles for researchers desiring to scale up and spread effective, clinical trial-tested interventions to benefit patients.

Made to measure—Selecting outcomes in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage research

There has been limited new high-level evidence generated to guide aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) management in the past decade. The choice of outcome measures used in aSAH clinical trials may be one of the factors hindering progress. In this narrative review we consider the current process for determining “what” to measure in aSAH and identify some of the shortcomings of these approaches. A consideration of the unique clinical course of aSAH is then discussed and how this impacts on selecting the best timepoints to assess change in the chosen constructs. We also review the how to critically appraise different measurement instruments and some of the issues with how these are applied in the context of aSAH. We conclude with current initiatives to improve outcome selection in aSAH and future directions in the research agenda.