Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31185918›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2019

Effective stakeholder engagement: design and implementation of a clinical trial (SWOG S1415CD) to improve cancer care.

Sarah Barger, Sean D Sullivan, Ari Bell-Brown, Brad Bott, Anne Marie Ciccarella, John Golenski, Mark Gorman, Judy Johnson, Karma Kreizenbeck, Florence Kurttila and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing 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

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

  1. Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

18 authors.

Sarah BargerHutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Seattle, WA, USA.
Sean D SullivanCHOICE Institute, School of Pharmacy, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA. sdsull@u.washington.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-3052-6540
Ari Bell-BrownHutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Seattle, WA, USA.
Brad BottIntermountain Healthcare, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Anne Marie CiccarellaIndependent Patient Research Partner and SWOG Digital Engagement Committee Member, New York, NY, USA.
John GolenskiKairoi Healthcare Strategies, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Mark GormanCancer Survivor Advisor, Silver Spring, MD, USA.
Judy JohnsonSWOG Lung Committee Patient Advocate, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Karma KreizenbeckHutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Seattle, WA, USA.
Florence KurttilaSWOG GI Committee Patient Advocate, Citrus Heights, CA, USA.
Ginny MasonSWOG Breast Committee Patient Advocate, West Lafayette, IN, USA.
Jamie MyersUniversity of Kansas, School of Nursing, Kansas City, KS, USA.
Carole SeigelSWOG GI (Pancreatic Cancer) Committee, Patient Advocate, Boston, MA, USA.
James L WadeHeartland NCORP, Decatur, IL, USA.
Guneet WaliaGenentech, Inc, South San Francisco, CA, USA.
Kate WatabayashiHutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Seattle, WA, USA.
Gary H LymanHutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Seattle, WA, USA.
Scott D RamseyHutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Seattle, WA, USA.

Funding

SWOG NCORP Research BaseUG1CA189974 · NCI · THE HOPE FOUNDATION · PI CHARLES D. BLANKE, DAWN HERSHMAN · 2014 to 2026
$80.6M
NCI NIH HHS UG1 CA189974
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center has engaged an External Stakeholder Advisory Group (ESAG) in the planning and implementation of the TrACER Study (S1415CD), a five-year pragmatic clinical trial assessing the effectiveness of a guideline-based colony stimulating factor standing order intervention. The trial is being conducted by SWOG through the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program in 45 clinics. The ESAG includes ten patient partners, two payers, two pharmacists, two guideline experts, four providers and one medical ethicist. This manuscript describes the ESAG's role and impact on the trial.

methodsDuring early trial development, the research team assembled the ESAG to inform plans for each phase of the trial. ESAG members provide feedback and engage in problem solving to improve trial implementation. Each year, members participate in one in-person meeting, web conferences and targeted email discussion. Additionally, they complete a survey that assesses their satisfaction with communication and collaboration. The research team collected and reviewed stakeholder input from 2014 to 2018 for impact on the trial.

resultsThe ESAG has informed trial design, implementation and dissemination planning. The group advised the trial's endpoints, regimen list and development of cohort and usual care arms. Based on ESAG input, the research team enhanced patient surveys and added pharmacy-related questions to the component application to assess order entry systems. ESAG patient partners collaborated with the research team to develop a patient brochure and study summary for clinic staff. In addition to identifying recruitment strategies and patient-oriented platforms for publicly sharing results, ESAG members participated as co-authors on this manuscript and a conference poster presentation highlighting stakeholder influence on the trial. The annual satisfaction survey results suggest that ESAG members were satisfied with the methods, frequency and target areas of their engagement in the trial during project years 1-3.

conclusionsDiverse stakeholder engagement has been essential in optimizing the design, implementation and planned dissemination of the TrACER Study. The lessons described in the manuscript may assist others to effectively partner with stakeholders on clinical research.

Indexed as

Patient Outcome AssessmentStakeholder ParticipationClinical Trials as TopicConsultantsHumansNeoplasmsPatient ParticipationCancerCancer care delivery researchClinical trialOncologyPatient engagementStakeholder engagement

Identifiers

PMID31185918
PMCPMC6560751

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.