Incorporating parent, former patient and clinician perspectives in the design of a national UK double-cluster, randomised controlled trial addressing uncertainties in preterm nutrition

Author:

Lammons WilliamORCID,Moss Becky,Battersby CherylORCID,Cornelius Victoria,Babalis Daphne,Modi Neena

Abstract

BackgroundComparative effectiveness randomised controlled trials are powerful tools to resolve uncertainties in existing treatments and care processes. We sought parent and patient perspectives on the design of a planned national, double-cluster randomised controlled trial (COLLABORATE) to resolve two longstanding uncertainties in preterm nutrition.MethodsWe used qualitative focus groups and interviews with parents, former patients and clinicians. We followed the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research checklist and conducted framework analysis, a specific methodology within thematic analysis.ResultsWe identified support for the trial’s methodology and vision, and elicited themes illustrating parents’ emotional needs in relation to clinical research. These were: relieving the pressure on mothers to breastfeed; opt-out consent as reducing parent stress; the desire for research to be a partnership between clinicians, parents and researchers; the value of presenting trial information in a collaborative tone; and in a format that allows assimilation by parents at their own pace. We identified anxiety and cognitive dissonance among some clinicians in which they recognised the uncertainties that justify the trial but felt unable to participate because of their strongly held views.ConclusionsThe early involvement of parents and former patients identified the centrality of parents’ emotional needs in the design of comparative effectiveness research. These insights have been incorporated into trial enrolment processes and information provided to participants. Specific outputs were a two-sided leaflet providing very brief as well as more detailed information, and use of language that parents perceive as inclusive and participatory. Further work is warranted to support clinicians to address personal biases that inhibit trial participation.

Publisher

BMJ

Subject

Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health

Reference29 articles.

1. Formula versus donor breast milk for feeding preterm or low birth weight infants;McGuire;Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews,2019

2. Multi-nutrient fortification of human milk for preterm infants;Brown;Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews,2013

3. Identification of variation in nutritional practice in neonatal units in England and association with clinical outcomes using agnostic machine learning;Greenbury;Sci Rep,2021

4. Core outcomes in neonatology: development of a core outcome set for neonatal research

5. Developing routinely recorded clinical data from electronic patient records as a national resource to improve neonatal health care: the medicines for neonates research programme;Modi;Programme Grants for Applied Research,2019

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3