Trial reportTrials2017
Staff experiences of closing out a clinical trial involving withdrawal of treatment: qualitative study.
Trial report in Trials, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhancing Trial Delivery in Parkinson's Disease: Qualitative Insights from PD STAT.Journal of Parkinson's disease · 2022Trial
- Impact of COVID-19 disease on clinical research in pediatric and congenital cardiology.Archives de pediatrie : organe officiel de la Societe francaise de pediatrie · 2022Observational
- Remote Health Monitoring in Clinical Trial using Machine Learning Techniques: A Conceptual Framework.Health and technology · 2022Review
- Qualitative and Quantitative Study on Components of Future Time Perspective and Their Association with Persistent Treatment for Type 2 Diabetes.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2021Article
- A qualitative study of clinician attitudes towards closed-loop systems in mainstream diabetes care in England.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2020Article
- COVID-19 Ethics and Research.Mayo Clinic proceedings · 2020Article
- Who Should Access Closed-Loop Technology? A Qualitative Study of Clinician Attitudes in England.Diabetes technology & therapeutics · 2020Article
- Older adults' perceptions of wearable technology hip protectors: implications for further research and development strategies.Disability and rehabilitation. Assistive technology · 2019Article
- Who should pay for the continuity of post-trial health care treatments?International journal for equity in health · 2019Article
- Training health professionals to recruit into challenging randomized controlled trials improved confidence: the development of the QuinteT randomized controlled trial recruitment training intervention.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe ending of a clinical trial may be challenging, particularly if staff are required to withdraw the investigated treatment(s); however, this aspect of trial work is surprisingly under-researched. To address this gap, we explored the experiences of staff involved in closing out a trial that entailed withdrawal of treatment (insulin pumps) from some patients.
methodsInterviews were conducted with n = 22 staff, recruited from seven trial sites. Data were analysed thematically.
resultsStaff described a myriad of ethical and emotional challenges at closeout, many of which had been unforeseen when the trial began. A key challenge for staff was that, while patients gave their agreement to participate on the understanding that pump treatment could be withdrawn, they often found themselves benefitting from this regimen in ways they could not have foreseen. Hence, as the trial progressed, patients became increasingly anxious about withdrawal of treatment. This situation forced staff to consider whether the consent patients had given at the outset remained valid; it also presented them with a dilemma at closeout because many of those who had wanted to remain on a pump did not meet the clinical criteria required for post-trial funding. When deciding whether to withdraw treatment, staff not only had to take funding pressures and patient distress into account, but they also found themselves caught between an ethic of Hippocratic individualism and one of utilitarianism. These conflicting pressures and ethical considerations resulted in staff decision-making varying across the sites, an issue that some described as a further source of ethical unease. Staff concluded that, had there been more advanced planning and discussion, and greater accountability to an ethics committee, some of the challenges they had confronted at closeout could have been lessened or even prevented.
conclusionsThe same kinds of ethical issues that may vex staff at the beginning of a trial (e.g. patients having unrealistic expectations of trial participation; staff experiencing conflicts between research and clinical roles) may re-present themselves at the end. To safeguard the wellbeing of staff and patients, greater planning, coordination and ethical oversight should go into the closeout of trials involving withdrawal of treatment(s).
trial registrationInternational Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Number (ISRCTN) Registry, ISRCTN61215213 . Registered on 11 May 2011.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.