Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29310706›Full record

ArticleTrials2018

Commentary: considerations for using the 'Trials within Cohorts' design in a clinical trial of an investigational medicinal product.

Anna C Bibby, David J Torgerson, Samantha Leach, Helen Lewis-White, Nick A Maskell

Abstract readLetter
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Anna C BibbyAcademic Respiratory Unit, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 2nd Floor Learning & Research Building, Southmead Hospital, Bristol, BS10 5NB, UK. anna.bibby@bristol.ac.uk.
David J TorgersonYork Trials Unit, University of York, York, UK.
Samantha LeachResearch & Innovation, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, UK.
Helen Lewis-WhiteResearch & Innovation, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, UK.
Nick A MaskellAcademic Respiratory Unit, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 2nd Floor Learning & Research Building, Southmead Hospital, Bristol, BS10 5NB, UK.

Funding

Department of Health DRF-2016-09-065Research Trainees Coordinating Centre DRF-2016-09-065
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe 'trials within cohorts' (TwiC) design is a pragmatic approach to randomised trials in which trial participants are randomly selected from an existing cohort. The design has multiple potential benefits, including the option of conducting multiple trials within the same cohort. MAIN TEXT: To date, the TwiC design methodology been used in numerous clinical settings but has never been applied to a clinical trial of an investigational medicinal product (CTIMP). We have recently secured the necessary approvals to undertake the first CTIMP using the TwiC design. In this paper, we describe some of the considerations and modifications required to ensure such a trial is compliant with Good Clinical Practice and international clinical trials regulations. We advocate using a two-stage consent process and using the consent stages to explicitly differentiate between trial participants and cohort participants who are providing control data. This distinction ensured compliance but had consequences with respect to costings, recruitment and the trial assessment schedule.

conclusionWe have demonstrated that it is possible to secure ethical and regulatory approval for a CTIMP TwiC. By including certain considerations at the trial design stage, we believe this pragmatic and efficient methodology could be utilised in other CTIMPs in future.

Indexed as

Research DesignEthics CommitteesHumansInformed ConsentPatient SelectionPragmatic Clinical Trials as TopicRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicResearch Support as TopicWorkflowClinical trial of an investigational medicinal productCohort multiple randomised controlled trialsTrials within cohortsTwo-stage consent

Identifiers

PMID29310706
PMCPMC5759253

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.