Abstract
Abstract
Background
Clinical trials aim to draw conclusions about the effects of treatments, but a trial can address many different potential questions. For example, does the treatment work well for patients who take it as prescribed? Or does it work regardless of whether patients take it exactly as prescribed? Since different questions can lead to different conclusions on treatment benefit, it is important to clearly understand what treatment effect a trial aims to investigate—this is called the ‘estimand’. Using estimands helps to ensure trials are designed and analysed to answer the questions of interest to different stakeholders, including patients and public. However, there is uncertainty about whether patients and public would like to be involved in defining estimands and how to do so. Public partners are patients and/or members of the public who are part of, or advise, the research team. We aimed to (i) co-develop a tool with public partners that helps explain what an estimand is and (ii) explore public partner’s perspectives on the importance of discussing estimands during trial design.
Methods
An online consultation meeting was held with 5 public partners of mixed age, gender and ethnicities, from various regions of the UK. Public partner opinions were collected and a practical tool describing estimands, drafted before the meeting by the research team, was developed. Afterwards, the tool was refined, and additional feedback sought via email.
Results
Public partners want to be involved in estimand discussions. They found an introductory tool, to be presented and described to them by a researcher, helpful for starting a discussion about estimands in a trial design context. They recommended storytelling, analogies and visual aids within the tool. Four topics related to public partners’ involvement in defining estimands were identified: (i) the importance of addressing questions that are relevant to patients and public in trials, (ii) involving public partners early on, (iii) a need for education and communication for all stakeholders and (iv) public partners and researchers working together.
Conclusions
We co-developed a tool for researchers and public partners to use to facilitate the involvement of public partners in estimand discussions.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Pharmacology (medical),Medicine (miscellaneous)
Reference15 articles.
1. Dodd S, White IR, Williamson P. Nonadherence to treatment protocol in published randomised controlled trials: a review. Trials. 2012;13(1):84.
2. Haynes RB, McDonald HP, Garg AX. Helping patients follow prescribed treatment: clinical applications. JAMA. 2002;288(22):2880–3.
3. Cro S, Kahan BC, Rehal S, Chis Ster A, Carpenter JR, White IR, et al. Evaluating how clear the questions being investigated in randomised trials are: systematic review of estimands. BMJ. 2022;378:e070146.
4. Cro S. Time to improve the clarity of clinical trial reports by including estimands. BMJ. 2022;378:o2108.
5. International council for harmonisation of technical requirements for pharmaceuticals for human use. Addendum on estimands and sensitivity analysis in clinical trials to the guideline on statistical principles for clinical trials 20 november 2019. Available at https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/E9-R1_Step4_Guideline_2019_1203.pdf. Accessed 30.06.23.
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献