Mellor, K, Eddy, S, Peckham, N, Bond, CM, Campbell, MJ, Lancaster, GA ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6957-6177, Thabane, L, Eldridge, SM, Dutton, SJ and Hopewell, S (2021) Progression from external pilot to definitive randomised controlled trial: a methodological review of progression criteria reporting. BMJ Open, 11 (6). e048178 - ?.

[img]
Preview
Text
Mellor et al BMJ Open 2021 + supp.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (777kB) | Preview

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Prespecified progression criteria can inform the decision to progress from an external randomised pilot trial to a definitive randomised controlled trial. We assessed the characteristics of progression criteria reported in external randomised pilot trial protocols and results publications, including whether progression criteria were specified a priori and mentioned in prepublication peer reviewer reports. STUDY DESIGN: Methodological review. METHODS: We searched four journals through PubMed: British Medical Journal Open, Pilot and Feasibility Studies, Trials and Public Library of Science One. Eligible publications reported external randomised pilot trial protocols or results, were published between January 2018 and December 2019 and reported progression criteria. We double data extracted 25% of the included publications. Here we report the progression criteria characteristics. RESULTS: We included 160 publications (123 protocols and 37 completed trials). Recruitment and retention were the most frequent indicators contributing to progression criteria. Progression criteria were mostly reported as distinct thresholds (eg, achieving a specific target; 133/160, 83%). Less than a third of the planned and completed pilot trials that included qualitative research reported how these findings would contribute towards progression criteria (34/108, 31%). The publications seldom stated who established the progression criteria (12/160, 7.5%) or provided rationale or justification for progression criteria (44/160, 28%). Most completed pilot trials reported the intention to proceed to a definitive trial (30/37, 81%), but less than half strictly met all of their progression criteria (17/37, 46%). Prepublication peer reviewer reports were available for 153/160 publications (96%). Peer reviewer reports for 86/153 (56%) publications mentioned progression criteria, with peer reviewers of 35 publications commenting that progression criteria appeared not to be specified. CONCLUSIONS: Many external randomised pilot trial publications did not adequately report or propose prespecified progression criteria to inform whether to proceed to a future definitive randomised controlled trial.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Uncontrolled Keywords: clinical trials, protocols & guidelines, statistics & research methods
Subjects: R Medicine > R Medicine (General)
R Medicine > RA Public aspects of medicine
Divisions: Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > School of Medicine
Related URLs:
Depositing User: Symplectic
Date Deposited: 06 Jul 2021 15:22
Last Modified: 06 Jul 2021 15:22
URI: https://eprints.keele.ac.uk/id/eprint/9791

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item