Management and conduct of randomized controlled trials

Applying probabilistic temporal and multisite data quality control methods to a public health mortality registry in Spain: a systematic approach to quality control of repositories

Objective To assess the variability in data distributions among data sources and over time through a case study of a large multisite repository as a systematic approach to data quality (DQ).

Materials and Methods Novel probabilistic DQ control methods based on information theory and geometry are applied to the Public Health Mortality Registry of the Region of Valencia, Spain, with 512 143 entries from 2000 to 2012, disaggregated into 24 health departments. The methods provide DQ metrics and exploratory visualizations for (1) assessing the variability among multiple sources and (2) monitoring and exploring changes with time. The methods are suited to big data and multitype, multivariate, and multimodal data.

Results The repository was partitioned into 2 probabilistically separated temporal subgroups following a change in the Spanish National Death Certificate in 2009. Punctual temporal anomalies were noticed due to a punctual increment in the missing data, along with outlying and clustered health departments due to differences in populations or in practices.

Discussion Changes in protocols, differences in populations, biased practices, or other systematic DQ problems affected data variability. Even if semantic and integration aspects are addressed in data sharing infrastructures, probabilistic variability may still be present. Solutions include fixing or excluding data and analyzing different sites or time periods separately. A systematic approach to assessing temporal and multisite variability is proposed.

Conclusion Multisite and temporal variability in data distributions affects DQ, hindering data reuse, and an assessment of such variability should be a part of systematic DQ procedures.

Training Cameroonian researchers on pragmatic knowledge translation trials: a workshop report

Limited health research capacity in one of the factors that prevents developing countries from attaining optimal health outcomes and achieving the Millennium Development Goals. We report here, the details of a workshop on pragmatic knowledge translation trials for Cameroonian researchers, the material covered and additional resources to support capacity development. At the end of this workshop, knowledge gains were noted and participants were able to initiate proposals for funding. These proposals were aimed at improving the clinical management of diabetes, hypertension and malaria.

A systematic review of on-site monitoring methods for health-care randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Monitoring the conduct of clinical trials is recommended by International Conference of Harmonisation Good Clinical Practice (ICH GCP) guidelines and is integral to trial quality assurance. On-site monitoring, that is, visiting trial sites, is one part of this process but little is known about the procedures that are performed in practice.

PURPOSE

To examine and summarise published on-site monitoring methods for health-care clinical trials, including evaluations of their benefits and costs to trials.

METHODS

A systematic literature review identified all articles reporting the methods and practices of on-site monitoring of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Articles were categorised into (1) reports from research groups and organisations, (2) reports from individual RCTs, (3) randomised trials of on-site monitoring interventions, (4) cost simulations, or (5) surveys of trial staff and monitors. Data were extracted on the characteristics of the trials and groups reporting on-site monitoring (e.g., geographical origin, sponsor, and trial focus). Information from articles in categories (1)-(3) was summarised on the frequency and scope of site monitoring visits, monitoring team size and composition, activities during site visits, and reporting structures. Evaluations of the benefits and disadvantages of on-site monitoring were examined for all included articles.

RESULTS

In total, 57 articles were identified, comprising 21 articles about the on-site monitoring practices of 16 research groups, 30 articles from 26 RCTs, 1 on-site monitoring intervention RCT, 2 cost simulations, and 3 surveys. Publications in categories (1)-(3), mostly originated from the United States (33/52, 63%) or Europe (15/52, 29%), were predominantly describing non-commercial organisations or trials (45/52, 87%), with heart disease (9/26, 35%) or cancer (5/26, 19%) the commonest focus of individual RCTs. The frequency of visits ranged from every 6-8 weeks up to once every 3 years, with mostly all trial sites visited. The number of monitors visiting a site varied between 1 and 8. The most common on-site monitoring activity was verifying source data and consent forms, with a focus on data accuracy. Only six articles evaluated their on-site monitoring process, with improvements observed in recruitment rates and protocol adherence but with direct costs and staff time viewed as the major disadvantages. The on-site monitoring RCT ended prematurely so preventing full assessment.

LIMITATIONS

Trialists and organisations may utilise additional unpublished on-site monitoring systems. The varied terminology used to describe monitoring may have limited identification of some relevant articles.

CONCLUSIONS

This review demonstrated that on-site monitoring is utilised in trials worldwide but systems vary considerably with little evidence to support practice. These on-site monitoring practices need to be evaluated empirically, including costs, to provide robust evidence for the contribution of site visits to trial performance and quality.

A Peer Review Intervention for Monitoring and Evaluating sites (PRIME) that improved randomized controlled trial conduct and performance

OBJECTIVE

Good clinical practice (GCP) guidelines emphasize trial site monitoring, although the implementation is unspecified and evidence for benefit is sparse. We aimed to develop a site monitoring process using peer reviewers to improve staff training, site performance, data collection, and GCP compliance.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

The Peer Review Intervention for Monitoring and Evaluating sites (PRIME) team observed and gave feedback on trial recruitment and follow-up appointments, held staff meetings, and examined documentation during annual 2-day site visits. The intervention was evaluated in the ProtecT trial, a UK randomized controlled trial of localized prostate cancer treatments (ISRCTN20141297). The ProtecT coordinator and senior nurses conducted three monitoring rounds at eight sites (2004-2007). The process evaluation used PRIME report findings, trial databases, resource use, and a site nurse survey.

RESULTS

Adverse findings decreased across all sites from 44 in round 1 to 19 in round 3. Most findings related to protocol adherence or site organizational issues, including improvements in eligibility criteria application and data collection. Staff found site monitoring acceptable and made changes after reviews.

CONCLUSION

The PRIME process used observation by peer reviewers to improve protocol adherence and train site staff, which increased trial performance and consistency.

State of head and neck surgical oncology research--a review and critical appraisal of landmark studies

Surgical literature has been criticized for the lack of high-quality research. The present review examines methodological quality of literature published in head and neck surgical oncology. We focus on landmark studies published on topics of best practice controversy, namely (1) the role of chemotherapy and organ-preservation protocols in the management of head and neck mucosal malignancies; (2) the role of selective neck dissection versus radical neck dissection; and (3) the role of laser microsurgery in the management of larynx cancer. Similar flaws were evident in selected landmark studies with the major issue being multiplicity in the form of multiple outcome analysis, comparison of multiple treatment groups, repeated measures over time, planned interim analyses, and subgroup analyses. The open nonrandomized controlled trial may be a feasible option in head and neck surgical research allowing for standardization, uniformity, consistency, and blinded outcome assessment.