Global health trials methodological research agenda: results from a priority setting exercise

Abstract

BackgroundMethodological research into the design, conduct, analysis and reporting of trials is essential to optimise the process. UK specialists in the field have established a set of top priorities in aid of this research. These priorities, however, may not be reflected in the needs of similar research in low- to middle-income countries (LMICs) with different healthcare provision, resources and research infrastructure. The aim of the study was to identify the top priorities for methodological research in LMICs to inform further research and ultimately to improve clinical trials in these regions.MethodsAn online, two-round survey was conducted from December 2016 to April 2017 amongst researchers and methodologists working on trials in LMICs. The first round required participants to suggest between three and six topics which they felt were priorities for trial methodological research in LMICs. The second round invited participants to grade the importance of a compulsory list of topics suggested by four or more individuals, and an optional list of the remaining topics.FindingsRounds 1 and 2 were completed by 412 and 314 participants, respectively. A wide spread of years of experience, discipline, current country of residence, origin of trials training and area of involvement in trials was reported. The topics deemed most important for methodological research were: choosing appropriate outcomes to measure and training of research staff.ConclusionBy presenting these top priorities we have the foundations of a global health trials methodological research agenda which we hope will foster future research in specific areas in order to increase and improve trials in LMICs.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-018-2440-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Selecting Core Outcomes for Randomised Effectiveness trials In Type 2 diabetes (SCORE-IT): a patient and healthcare professional consensus on a core outcome set for type 2 diabetes

“…However, despite Polish and Brazilian Portuguese versions being distributed, via direct email to members of patient organizations, participation was low, with only one person completing R1 of the Delphi in Polish. Choosing appropriate outcomes to measure is a top methodological priority for trialists working in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) 42. A recent review found the number of COS being developed in some LMICs has increased,41 yet the number of participants in each COS, the methods of engagement and the source of recruitment have yet to be explored.…”

Choosing important health outcomes for comparative effectiveness research: An updated systematic review and involvement of low and middle income countries

“…A survey has recently been undertaken to identify the top priorities for trials methodological research in LMICs to inform further research and ultimately to improve clinical trials in these regions. The priority most commonly graded as critically important, amongst 400 participants from over 80 countries, was choosing appropriate outcomes to measure [ 25 ].…”

Doing trials within trials: a qualitative study of stakeholder views on barriers and facilitators to the routine adoption of methodology research in clinical trials

“…The views expressed here relate to the present delivery of publicly funded trials in the UK and may suffer from limited external validity to other contexts where funding and CTU arrangements may differ. Note also that priorities for methodological research differ between settings, with recruitment and retention less of an issue in low- and middle-income countries compared to outcome assessments [ 13 ].…”