Abstract

BackgroundSite performance is key to the success of large multicentre randomised trials. A standardised set of clear and accessible summaries of site performance could facilitate the timely identification and resolution of potential problems, minimising their impact.The aim of this study was to identify and agree a core set of key performance metrics for managing multicentre randomised trials.MethodsWe used a mixed methods approach to identify potential metrics and to achieve consensus about the final set, adapting methods that are recommended by the COMET Initiative for developing core outcome sets in health care.We used performance metrics identified from our systematic search and focus groups to create an online Delphi survey. We invited respondents to score each metric for inclusion in the final core set, over three survey rounds. Metrics scored as critical by ≥70% and unimportant by <15% of respondents were taken forward to a consensus meeting of representatives from key UK-based stakeholders. Participants in the consensus meeting discussed and voted on each metric, using anonymous electronic voting. Metrics with >50% of participants voting for inclusion were retained.ResultsRound 1 of the Delphi survey presented 28 performance metrics, and a further six were added in round 2. Of 294 UK-based stakeholders who registered for the Delphi survey, 211 completed all three rounds.At the consensus meeting, 17 metrics were discussed and voted on: 15 metrics were retained following survey round 3, plus two others that were preferred by consensus meeting participants. Consensus was reached on a final core set of eight performance metrics in three domains: (1) recruitment and retention, (2) data quality and (3) protocol compliance. A simple tool for visual reporting of the metrics is available from the Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit website.ConclusionsWe have established a core set of metrics for measuring the performance of sites in multicentre randomised trials. These metrics could improve trial conduct by enabling researchers to identify and address problems before trials are adversely affected. Future work could evaluate the effectiveness of using the metrics and reporting tool.

Highlights

  • Site performance is key to the success of large multicentre randomised trials

  • A standardised set of clear and accessible summaries of site performance could facilitate the timely identification and resolution of problems, minimising their impact. Researchers monitor data such as participant accrual, case report form returns, data quality, missing outcome data and serious protocol violations or breaches of good clinical practice, to our knowledge, no work has been conducted to establish a consensus on a core set of metrics for monitoring performance of sites in non-commercial clinical trials

  • To be manageable and retain focus on items that really matter, a standardised set of site performance metrics would ideally number around eight to 12 items [1], and would be presented within a tool that could be monitored by a trial manager

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Site performance is key to the success of large multicentre randomised trials. A standardised set of clear and accessible summaries of site performance could facilitate the timely identification and resolution of potential problems, minimising their impact. A key risk to their successful delivery is the performance of trial sites in recruiting and retaining participants, and in collecting complete high-quality data in a timely manner. A standardised set of clear and accessible summaries of site performance could facilitate the timely identification and resolution of problems, minimising their impact. Researchers monitor data such as participant accrual, case report form returns, data quality, missing outcome data and serious protocol violations or breaches of good clinical practice, to our knowledge, no work has been conducted to establish a consensus on a core set of metrics for monitoring performance of sites in non-commercial clinical trials. To be manageable and retain focus on items that really matter, a standardised set of site performance metrics would ideally number around eight to 12 items [1], and would be presented within a tool that could be monitored by a trial manager

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call