Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Trials 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Study protocol

Developing a framework for the ethical design and conduct of pragmatic trials in healthcare: a mixed methods research protocol

Authors: Monica Taljaard, Charles Weijer, Jeremy M. Grimshaw, Adnan Ali, Jamie C. Brehaut, Marion K. Campbell, Kelly Carroll, Sarah Edwards, Sandra Eldridge, Christopher B. Forrest, Bruno Giraudeau, Cory E. Goldstein, Ian D. Graham, Karla Hemming, Spencer Phillips Hey, Austin R. Horn, Vipul Jairath, Terry P. Klassen, Alex John London, Susan Marlin, John C. Marshall, Lauralyn McIntyre, Joanne E. McKenzie, Stuart G. Nicholls, P. Alison Paprica, Merrick Zwarenstein, Dean A. Fergusson

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

There is a widely recognized need for more pragmatic trials that evaluate interventions in real-world settings to inform decision-making by patients, providers, and health system leaders. Increasing availability of electronic health records, centralized research ethics review, and novel trial designs, combined with support and resources from governments worldwide for patient-centered research, have created an unprecedented opportunity to advance the conduct of pragmatic trials, which can ultimately improve patient health and health system outcomes. Such trials raise ethical issues that have not yet been fully addressed, with existing literature concentrating on regulations in specific jurisdictions rather than arguments grounded in ethical principles. Proposed solutions (e.g. using different regulations in “learning healthcare systems”) are speculative with no guarantee of improvement over existing oversight procedures. Most importantly, the literature does not reflect a broad vision of protecting the core liberty and welfare interests of research participants. Novel ethical guidance is required. We have assembled a team of ethicists, trialists, methodologists, social scientists, knowledge users, and community members with the goal of developing guidance for the ethical design and conduct of pragmatic trials.

Methods

Our project will combine empirical and conceptual work and a consensus development process. Empirical work will: (1) identify a comprehensive list of ethical issues through interviews with a small group of key informants (e.g. trialists, ethicists, chairs of research ethics committees); (2) document current practices by reviewing a random sample of pragmatic trials and surveying authors; (3) elicit views of chairs of research ethics committees through surveys in Canada, UK, USA, France, and Australia; and (4) elicit views and experiences of community members and health system leaders through focus groups and surveys. Conceptual work will consist of an ethical analysis of identified issues and the development of new ethical solutions, outlining principles, policy options, and rationales. The consensus development process will involve an independent expert panel to develop a final guidance document.

Discussion

Planned output includes manuscripts, educational materials, and tailored guidance documents to inform and support researchers, research ethics committees, journal editors, regulators, and funders in the ethical design and conduct of pragmatic trials.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Zwarenstein M. ‘Pragmatic’ and ‘Explanatory’ attitudes to randomized trials. J R Soc Med. 2016;110:208–18.CrossRef Zwarenstein M. ‘Pragmatic’ and ‘Explanatory’ attitudes to randomized trials. J R Soc Med. 2016;110:208–18.CrossRef
12.
18.
go back to reference Bellomo R, Forbes A, Akram M, Bailey M, Pilcher DV, Cooper DK. Why we must cluster and cross over. Crit Care Resusc. 2013;15:155–7.PubMed Bellomo R, Forbes A, Akram M, Bailey M, Pilcher DV, Cooper DK. Why we must cluster and cross over. Crit Care Resusc. 2013;15:155–7.PubMed
20.
go back to reference Donner A, Klar N. Design and analysis of cluster randomization trials in health research. London: Arnold; 2000. Donner A, Klar N. Design and analysis of cluster randomization trials in health research. London: Arnold; 2000.
24.
go back to reference Annas GJ, Annas CL. Legally blind: the therapeutic illusion in the SUPPORT study of extremely premature infants. J Contemp Health L Pol’y. 2013;30:1–36. Annas GJ, Annas CL. Legally blind: the therapeutic illusion in the SUPPORT study of extremely premature infants. J Contemp Health L Pol’y. 2013;30:1–36.
27.
go back to reference Macklin R, Shepherd L, Dreger A, Asch A, Baylis F, Brody H, et al. The OHRP and SUPPORT — another view. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:e3.CrossRefPubMed Macklin R, Shepherd L, Dreger A, Asch A, Baylis F, Brody H, et al. The OHRP and SUPPORT — another view. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:e3.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference McIntyre L, Taljaard M, McArdle T, Fox-Robichaud A, English S, Martin C, et al. FLUID trial: a protocol for a hospital-wide open-label cluster crossover pragmatic comparative effectiveness randomized pilot trial. BMJ Open. 2018;8:e022780.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral McIntyre L, Taljaard M, McArdle T, Fox-Robichaud A, English S, Martin C, et al. FLUID trial: a protocol for a hospital-wide open-label cluster crossover pragmatic comparative effectiveness randomized pilot trial. BMJ Open. 2018;8:e022780.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
30.
go back to reference Patton MQ. Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 2002. Patton MQ. Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 2002.
31.
go back to reference Patton M. Qualitative research and evaluation methods. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2002. Patton M. Qualitative research and evaluation methods. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2002.
32.
go back to reference Lincoln Y, Guba E. Naturalistic Inquiry. New York, NY: Sage; 1985. Lincoln Y, Guba E. Naturalistic Inquiry. New York, NY: Sage; 1985.
33.
go back to reference Krueger RA, Casey MA. Focus groups: a practical guide for applied research. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2000. Krueger RA, Casey MA. Focus groups: a practical guide for applied research. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2000.
34.
go back to reference Bowling A. Research methods in health. 2nd ed. Maidenhead: Open University Press; 2004. Bowling A. Research methods in health. 2nd ed. Maidenhead: Open University Press; 2004.
35.
go back to reference McRae A, Bennett C, Belle Brown J, Weijer C, Boruch R, Brehaut J, et al. Researchers’ perceptions of ethical challenges in cluster randomized trials: a qualitative analysis. Trials. 2013;14:1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral McRae A, Bennett C, Belle Brown J, Weijer C, Boruch R, Brehaut J, et al. Researchers’ perceptions of ethical challenges in cluster randomized trials: a qualitative analysis. Trials. 2013;14:1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
39.
go back to reference Taljaard M, McGowan J, Grimshaw JM, Brehaut JC, McRae A, Eccles MP, et al. Electronic search strategies to identify reports of cluster randomized trials in MEDLINE: low precision will improve with adherence to reporting standards. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10:15.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Taljaard M, McGowan J, Grimshaw JM, Brehaut JC, McRae A, Eccles MP, et al. Electronic search strategies to identify reports of cluster randomized trials in MEDLINE: low precision will improve with adherence to reporting standards. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10:15.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
42.
go back to reference Dillman DA, Smyth JD, Christian LM. Internet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode surveys. The tailored design method. 4th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2014. Dillman DA, Smyth JD, Christian LM. Internet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode surveys. The tailored design method. 4th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2014.
44.
go back to reference Taljaard M, Chaudhry SH, Brehaut JC, Weijer C, Boruch R, Donner A, et al. Survey of consent practices in cluster randomized trials: improvements are needed in ethical conduct and reporting. Clin Trials. 2014;11:60–9.CrossRefPubMed Taljaard M, Chaudhry SH, Brehaut JC, Weijer C, Boruch R, Donner A, et al. Survey of consent practices in cluster randomized trials: improvements are needed in ethical conduct and reporting. Clin Trials. 2014;11:60–9.CrossRefPubMed
45.
go back to reference Gallo A, Weijer C, White A, Grimshaw JM, Boruch R, Brehaut JC, et al. What is the role and authority of gatekeepers in cluster randomized trials in health research? Trials. 2012;13:116.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Gallo A, Weijer C, White A, Grimshaw JM, Boruch R, Brehaut JC, et al. What is the role and authority of gatekeepers in cluster randomized trials in health research? Trials. 2012;13:116.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
49.
go back to reference Taljaard M, Brehaut JC, Weijer C, Boruch R, Donner A, Eccles MP, et al. Variability in research ethics review of cluster randomized trials: a scenario-based survey in three countries. Trials. 2014;15:48.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Taljaard M, Brehaut JC, Weijer C, Boruch R, Donner A, Eccles MP, et al. Variability in research ethics review of cluster randomized trials: a scenario-based survey in three countries. Trials. 2014;15:48.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
50.
go back to reference QSR International Pty Ltd. NVivo qualitative data analysis Software. Version 11 edn; 2017. QSR International Pty Ltd. NVivo qualitative data analysis Software. Version 11 edn; 2017.
51.
go back to reference Marshall C, Rossman G. Designing qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1989. Marshall C, Rossman G. Designing qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1989.
54.
58.
go back to reference Faden RR, Beauchamp TL, Kass NE. Informed consent, comparative effectiveness, and learning health care. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:766–8.CrossRefPubMed Faden RR, Beauchamp TL, Kass NE. Informed consent, comparative effectiveness, and learning health care. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:766–8.CrossRefPubMed
60.
go back to reference Taljaard M, Weijer C, Grimshaw JM, Eccles MP, Ottawa Ethics of Cluster Randomised Trials Consensus Group. The Ottawa Statement on the ethical design and conduct of cluster randomised trials: précis for researchers and research ethics committees. BMJ. 2013;346:f2838. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f2838.CrossRefPubMed Taljaard M, Weijer C, Grimshaw JM, Eccles MP, Ottawa Ethics of Cluster Randomised Trials Consensus Group. The Ottawa Statement on the ethical design and conduct of cluster randomised trials: précis for researchers and research ethics committees. BMJ. 2013;346:f2838. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1136/​bmj.​f2838.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Developing a framework for the ethical design and conduct of pragmatic trials in healthcare: a mixed methods research protocol
Authors
Monica Taljaard
Charles Weijer
Jeremy M. Grimshaw
Adnan Ali
Jamie C. Brehaut
Marion K. Campbell
Kelly Carroll
Sarah Edwards
Sandra Eldridge
Christopher B. Forrest
Bruno Giraudeau
Cory E. Goldstein
Ian D. Graham
Karla Hemming
Spencer Phillips Hey
Austin R. Horn
Vipul Jairath
Terry P. Klassen
Alex John London
Susan Marlin
John C. Marshall
Lauralyn McIntyre
Joanne E. McKenzie
Stuart G. Nicholls
P. Alison Paprica
Merrick Zwarenstein
Dean A. Fergusson
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Trials / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-018-2895-x

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Trials 1/2018 Go to the issue