The first step in a clinical trial is deciding the #ResearchQuestion. Knowing which question is most important to focus on may not be clear cut. An interesting paper was recently published which developed a tool to rank the importance of research questions 1/7 #MethodologyMonday
This tool was developed for the musculo-skeletal field (ANZMUSC-RQIT), but the concepts are highly likely to be transferable to other fields 2/7 journals.plos.org/plosone/articl…
The tool identified 5 domains to be ranked:1) extent of stakeholder consensus, 2) social burden of health condition, 3) patient burden of health condition, 4) anticipated effectiveness of proposed intervention, and 5) extent to which health equity is addressed by the research 3/7
Each domain is then rated, with each domain level having an assigned score. The scores are then summed to obtain an overall RQIT score, which represents the importance of the research question. Totals can range from 0-1000; the higher the score the more important the RQ 4/7
There are other methods for identifying research questions which could also be used. One is the @LindAlliance priority setting partnership approach which brings together patients, carers & clinicians to jointly prioritise unanswered research questions 5/7 jla.nihr.ac.uk
It is, however, important that whichever method is used, the chosen research question then be fully specified using the full PICO method - Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome 6/7 bestpractice.bmj.com/info/toolkit/l…
Others sometimes add a “T” to PICO (T for time/duration of outcome collection) to add further specificity. Personally I would add a “D” to the end of PICO - which Decicion-Makers are you trying to inform 7/7
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
There was an interesting paper this week on different stakeholders understanding of the concept of #equipoise. Equipoise is an essential concept in clinical trials but is often not well understood 1/8 #MethodologyMonday
For it to be ethical to randomise in a trial, it is important that there is uncertainty which treatment is best 2/8
Originally uncertainty (equipoise) had to be at the level of the individual clinician but was refined to uncertainty at the professional community level by Freedman in the 1980s 3/8 nejm.org/doi/full/10.10…
For a factorial trial of say 2 treatments, patients are allocated to 1 of 4 groups: Gp1 receives both treatments A and B; Gp2 receives only A; Gp3 receives only B; and Gp4 receives neither A nor B (the control) 3/7 cambridge.org/core/services/…
Mostly we set up trials to test if a new treatment is better than another (ie we test for superiority) but in a #NonInferiority design we wish to test if a treatment is not unacceptably worse than a comparator. 2/8
The main reasons why we might look for non-inferiority is when an alternative treatment is say much cheaper, or has fewer side effects … but we would only wish to use it if the benefits of the standard treatment are not significantly compromised. 3/8 onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.10…
Having spent the last couple of weeks discussing composite & surrogate outcomes, I was reminded this week of the importance of thoughtful planning on the choice of outcomes in the first place 1/6 #MethodologyMonday
In particular I was reminded of the fundamental work of #Donabedian to conceptualise what is important to measure to assess quality of (and improvement in) health care. Although developed decades ago, it remains just as relevant today 2/6 jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/…
When we seek to assess the impact of a new intervention on care, the Donabedian model suggests there are 3 elements that may be impacted - the #structure the #process and the #outcome of care 3/6
Last week I discussed composite endpoints and how while they can be useful, they can also be fraught with difficulty. The same descriptors could equally be applied to #SurrogateOutcomes in clinical trials 1/9 #MethodologyMonday
A #SurrogateOutcome is a substitute measure (eg blood pressure) that one might use to stand in for the real outcome of interest (eg stroke) when the real outcomes of interest may take a very long time to measure - to allow trials to be completed more quickly & efficiently 2/9
Surrogate outcomes can take many forms and may be histological, physiological, radiological etc … biomarkers that predict events 3/9
Choosing the right outcome is key to a clinical trial. Sometimes a #CompositeOutcome
- an outcome that combines more than one dimension into a single measure - is felt to be most appropriate. These can be useful but can be fraught with difficulty 1/8 #MethodologyMonday
One of the primary reasons for using a composite outcome is trial efficiency - you can get more events quickly compared to the individual components thus increasing precision and efficiency in sample size calculations 2/8 jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/…
However, the validity of a composite relies on consistency of the individual components -see Montori et al 3/8