The literature on interventions to improve recruitment to trials has plenty of variety but little depth. Only 3 of 72 comparisons are supported by high-certainty evidence according to GRADE: having an open trial and using telephone reminders to non-responders to postal interventions both increase recruitment; a specialised way of developing participant information leaflets had little or no effect. The methodology research community should improve the evidence base by replicating evaluations of existing strategies, rather than developing and testing new ones.
Randomised trials are a central component of all evidence-informed health care systems and the evidence coming from them helps to support health care users, health professionals and others to make more informed decisions about treatment. The evidence available to trialists to support decisions on design, conduct and reporting of randomised trials is, however, sparse. Trial Forge is an initiative that aims to increase the evidence base for trial decision-making and in doing so, to improve trial efficiency.One way to fill gaps in evidence is to run Studies Within A Trial, or SWATs. This guidance document provides a brief definition of SWATs, an explanation of why they are important and some practical ‘top tips’ that come from existing experience of doing SWATs. We hope the guidance will be useful to trialists, methodologists, funders, approvals agencies and others in making clear what a SWAT is, as well as what is involved in doing one.
The aim of this qualitative evidence synthesis is to explore the perceptions and experiences of potential and actual participants and trial recruiters to improve understanding of how interventions, strategies and processes of recruitment to RCTs potentially work for specific groups across different settings and contexts. The specific objectives of this review are:
BackgroundDespite the problem of inadequate recruitment to randomised trials, there is little evidence to guide researchers on decisions about how people are effectively recruited to take part in trials. The PRioRiTy study aimed to identify and prioritise important unanswered trial recruitment questions for research. The PRioRiTy study - Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) included members of the public approached to take part in a randomised trial or who have represented participants on randomised trial steering committees, health professionals and research staff with experience of recruiting to randomised trials, people who have designed, conducted, analysed or reported on randomised trials and people with experience of randomised trials methodology.MethodsThis partnership was aided by the James Lind Alliance and involved eight stages: (i) identifying a unique, relevant prioritisation area within trial methodology; (ii) establishing a steering group (iii) identifying and engaging with partners and stakeholders; (iv) formulating an initial list of uncertainties; (v) collating the uncertainties into research questions; (vi) confirming that the questions for research are a current recruitment challenge; (vii) shortlisting questions and (viii) final prioritisation through a face-to-face workshop.ResultsA total of 790 survey respondents yielded 1693 open-text answers to 6 questions, from which 1880 potential questions for research were identified. After merging duplicates, the number of questions was reduced to 496. Questions were combined further, and those that were submitted by fewer than 15 people and/or fewer than 6 of the 7 stakeholder groups were excluded from the next round of prioritisation resulting in 31 unique questions for research. All 31 questions were confirmed as being unanswered after checking relevant, up-to-date research evidence. The 10 highest priority questions were ranked at a face-to-face workshop. The number 1 ranked question was “How can randomised trials become part of routine care and best utilise current clinical care pathways?” The top 10 research questions can be viewed at www.priorityresearch.ie.ConclusionThe prioritised questions call for a collective focus on normalising trials as part of clinical care, enhancing communication, addressing barriers, enablers and motivators around participation and exploring greater public involvement in the research process.
Post-mortem investigations of human Alzheimer’s disease (AD) have largely failed to provide unequivocal evidence in support of the original amyloid cascade hypothesis, which postulated deposition of β-amyloid (Aβ) aggregates to be the cause of a demented state as well as inductive to tau neurofibrillary tangles (NFTs). Conflicting evidence suggests, however, that Aβ plaques and NFTs, albeit to a lesser extent, are present in a substantial subset of non-demented individuals. Hence, a range of soluble tau and Aβ species has more recently been implicated as the disease-relevant toxic entities. Despite the incorporation of soluble proteins into a revised amyloid cascade hypothesis, a detailed characterization of these species in the context of human AD onset, progression and cognitive decline has been lacking. Here, lateral temporal lobe samples (Brodmann area 21) of 46 human cases were profiled via tau and Aβ Western blot and native state dot blot protocols. Elevations in phospho-tau (antibodies: CP13, AT8 and PHF-1), pathological tau conformations (MC-1) and oligomeric tau (TOC1) agreed with medical diagnosis (non-AD cf. AD) and Braak stage classification (low, intermediate and high), alongside elevations in soluble Aβ species (MOAB-2 and pyro-glu Aβ) and a decline in levels of the amyloid precursor protein. Strong correlations were observed between individual Braak stages and multiple cognitive measures with all tau markers as well as total soluble Aβ. In contrast to previous reports, SDS-stable Aβ oligomers (*56) were not found to be reliable for all classifications and appeared likely to be a technical artefact. Critically, the robust predictive value of total soluble Aβ was dependent on native state quantification. Elevations in tau and Aβ within soluble fractions (Braak stage 2–3 cf. 0) were evident earlier than previously established in fibril-focused disease progression scales. Together, these data provide strong evidence that soluble forms of tau and Aβ co-localise early in AD and are closely linked to disease progression and cognitive decline.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00401-016-1632-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.