 |
|
Impact of Participant and Physician Intervention Preferences on Randomized Trials
A Systematic Review
Michael King, PhD;
Irwin Nazareth, PhD;
Fiona Lampe, PhD;
Peter Bower, PhD;
Martin Chandler, MSc;
Maria Morou, MSc;
Bonnie Sibbald, PhD;
Rosalind Lai, MLib
JAMA. 2005;293:1089-1099.
Context Allocation on the basis of randomization rather than patient choice is the gold standard of unbiased estimates of efficacy in clinical medicine. However, randomly allocating patients to treatments that do not accord with their preferences may influence internal and external validity.
Objective To determine whether preferences affect recruitment to trials (external validity) and outcomes in trials (internal validity)
Data Sources We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, AMED, and the Cochrane Library for articles published between 1966 and September 2004. We also hand-searched several major medical journals, searched reference lists of relevant articles, and contacted authors of published preference designs. The 2 themes in the first filter of the search strategy were preferences and possible determinants of preferences.
Study Selection Comprehensive cohorts and 2-stage trials that measured or recorded patient or physician preference, included allocation of participants to random and preference cohorts, and followed up all participants. We excluded trials with no recording of preference; of decision aids; with measurements of preferences for economic analyses; in which patients who refused randomization were followed up without reference to preferences; and of nonclinical populations.
Data Extraction Up to 4 reviewers independently evaluated the articles, and disagreements were resolved at project steering group meetings. We extracted data on study design, measurement of preference, recruitment, attrition, and summary data on the primary outcome(s) at baseline and each follow-up point.
Data Synthesis Of 10 023 citations identified, 170 articles met screening criteria and 32 (27 comprehensive cohorts and 5 two-stage trials) were determined to be eligible and were used in the final review. Although treatment preferences led to a substantial proportion of people refusing randomization, there was less evidence of bias in the characteristics of individuals agreeing to be randomized. Differences in outcome across the trials between randomized and preference groups were generally small, particularly in large trials and after accounting for baseline measures of outcome. Therefore, there was little evidence that preferences substantially interfere with the internal validity of randomized trials.
Conclusions Preferences influence whether people participate in randomized trials, but there is little evidence that they significantly affect validity.
Author Affiliations: Department of Mental Health Sciences (Dr King, Mr Chandler, and Ms Morou), Department of Primary Care and Population Sciences (Drs Nazareth and Lampe), and the Medical Library (Ms Lai), Royal Free and University College Medical School, Royal Free Campus, London; National Primary Care Research and Development Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester (Drs Bower and Sibbald), England.
RELATED LETTERS
Patient Preference and Validity of Randomized Controlled Trials
Alex H. Cho, George L. Jackson, and Hayden B. Bosworth
JAMA. 2005;294(1):41.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Patient Preference and Validity of Randomized Controlled Trials
David Torgerson and Jennifer Klaber Moffett
JAMA. 2005;294(1):41-42.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Patient Preference and Validity of Randomized Controlled Trials—Reply
Michael King, Irwin Nazareth, Fiona Lampe, and Peter Bower
JAMA. 2005;294(1):42.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
|
Ethical Considerations for Acupuncture and Chinese Herbal Medicine Clinical Trials: A Cross-cultural Perspective
Zaslawski
Evid Based Complement Alternat Med 2008;0:nen055v1-nen055.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The design and assessment of prospective randomised, controlled trials in orthopaedic surgery
Boutron et al.
J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007;89-B:858-863.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Bath PUVA and Saltwater Baths Followed by UV-B Phototherapy as Treatments for Psoriasis: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Schiener et al.
Arch Dermatol 2007;143:586-596.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The effectiveness and cost effectiveness of a national lay-led self care support programme for patients with long-term conditions: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial
Kennedy et al.
J. Epidemiol. Community Health 2007;61:254-261.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Patient preference randomised controlled trials in mental health research
HOWARD and THORNICROFT
Br. J. Psychiatry 2006;188:303-304.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Laparotomy Versus Peritoneal Drainage for Necrotizing Enterocolitis or Isolated Intestinal Perforation in Extremely Low Birth Weight Infants: Outcomes Through 18 Months Adjusted Age
Blakely et al.
Pediatrics 2006;117:e680-e687.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
"You decide doctor". What do patient preference arms in clinical trials really mean?
Bowling and Rowe
J. Epidemiol. Community Health 2005;59:914-915.
FULL TEXT
Patient Preference and Validity of Randomized Controlled Trials
Cho et al.
JAMA 2005;294:41-41.
FULL TEXT
Patient Preference and Validity of Randomized Controlled Trials
Torgerson and Moffett
JAMA 2005;294:41-42.
FULL TEXT
What's new in the other general journals
Tonks
BMJ 2005;330:561-562.
FULL TEXT
|
