Literature DB >> 33106910

The PRECIS-2 tool seems not to be useful to discriminate the degree of pragmatism of medicine masked trials from that of open-label trials.

Rafael Dal-Ré1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess, with all available trial information, whether the assessment of the PRECIS-2 nine domains could provide a clear distinction between medicine masked pragmatic randomized controlled trials (pRCTs) and open-label pRCTs.
METHODS: A search was conducted of participant-level pRCTs on medicines published on 25 influential medical journals in July 2018-December 2019. All pre-licensing (phases 1-3) and cluster pRCTs were excluded. All trials' available reports were searched through the published article information, Google Scholar, and trial websites. Instead of providing a score to each PRECIS-2 domain, these were classified as E (explanatory), N (neutral), or P (pragmatic).
RESULTS: Of 128 pRCTs, 18 (14%) were participant-level pRCTs on medicines. The full trial protocol was available for 14 trials; 12 had published the protocol and nine had additional reports published. All trials were prospectively registered, and none was funded by industry. Ten and eight were masked and open-label trials, respectively. Masked pRCTS had 34% of pragmatic and 60% of explanatory domains; open-label pRCTS had 45% pragmatic and 45% explanatory domains. Among the 10 masked trials, only one had a majority of five pragmatic domains; among the eight open-label trials, four had a majority of six or five pragmatic domains. "Follow-up" was considered explanatory in the 18 pRCTs; "primary analysis" was pragmatic in 17 pRCTs.
CONCLUSION: The PRECIS-2 tool seems not to be sensitive enough to clearly discriminate between medicine masked pRCTs and open-label pRCTs. When conducting systematic reviews, it is suggested that the PRECIS-2 tool should not be used to support placing masked trials in the pragmatic side of the explanatory/pragmatic continuum.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Explanatory trials; High influential journals; Medicines; PRECIS-2; Phase 4 trials; Pragmatic trials

Year:  2020        PMID: 33106910     DOI: 10.1007/s00228-020-03030-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol        ISSN: 0031-6970            Impact factor:   2.953


  46 in total

1.  The PRECIS-2 tool: designing trials that are fit for purpose.

Authors:  Kirsty Loudon; Shaun Treweek; Frank Sullivan; Peter Donnan; Kevin E Thorpe; Merrick Zwarenstein
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2015-05-08

2.  Study characteristics impacted the pragmatism of randomized controlled trial published in nursing: a meta-epidemiological study.

Authors:  Flora Devos; Frantz Foissac; Naim Bouazza; Pierre-Yves Ancel; Jean-Marc Tréluyer; Hélène Chappuy
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2019-07-30       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  Efficacy and effectiveness: The wrong use of different terms.

Authors:  Rafael Dal-Ré; Frits Rosendaal
Journal:  Eur J Intern Med       Date:  2018-05-03       Impact factor: 4.487

4.  The design can limit PRECIS-2 retrospective assessment of the clinical trial explanatory/pragmatic features.

Authors:  Rafael Dal-Ré; Anthonius de Boer; Stefan K James
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2020-04-21       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 5.  Trends in the Explanatory or Pragmatic Nature of Cardiovascular Clinical Trials Over 2 Decades.

Authors:  Nariman Sepehrvand; Wendimagegn Alemayehu; Debraj Das; Arjun K Gupta; Pishoy Gouda; Anukul Ghimire; Amy X Du; Sanaz Hatami; Hazal E Babadagli; Sanam Verma; Zakariya Kashour; Justin A Ezekowitz
Journal:  JAMA Cardiol       Date:  2019-11-01       Impact factor: 14.676

Review 6.  Explanatory and pragmatic clinical trials: a primer and application to a recent asthma trial.

Authors:  David L Sackett
Journal:  Pol Arch Med Wewn       Date:  2011 Jul-Aug

Review 7.  A pragmatic view on pragmatic trials.

Authors:  Nikolaos A Patsopoulos
Journal:  Dialogues Clin Neurosci       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 5.986

8.  Are trials of psychological and psychosocial interventions for schizophrenia and psychosis included in the NICE guidelines pragmatic? A systematic review.

Authors:  Chiara Gastaldon; Franziska Mosler; Sarah Toner; Federico Tedeschi; Victoria Jane Bird; Corrado Barbui; Stefan Priebe
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-09-24       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Improving the reporting of pragmatic trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement.

Authors:  Merrick Zwarenstein; Shaun Treweek; Joel J Gagnier; Douglas G Altman; Sean Tunis; Brian Haynes; Andrew D Oxman; David Moher
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2008-11-11

10.  Real-world evidence: How pragmatic are randomized controlled trials labeled as pragmatic?

Authors:  Rafael Dal-Ré; Perrine Janiaud; John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2018-04-03       Impact factor: 8.775

View more
  2 in total

1.  Blinding, pragmatism, and the PRECIS-2 tool for designing and assessing randomized trials.

Authors:  Merrick Zwarenstein; Alison Howie
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2021-01-04       Impact factor: 2.953

Review 2.  A review of pragmatic trials found a high degree of diversity in design and scope, deficiencies in reporting and trial registry data, and poor indexing.

Authors:  Stuart G Nicholls; Kelly Carroll; Spencer Phillips Hey; Merrick Zwarenstein; Jennifer Zhe Zhang; Hayden P Nix; Jamie C Brehaut; Joanne E McKenzie; Steve McDonald; Charles Weijer; Dean A Fergusson; Monica Taljaard
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2021-03-28       Impact factor: 6.437

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.