Skip to main content

Patient and Stakeholder Engagement in Designing Pragmatic Clinical Trials

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Decision Making in a World of Comparative Effectiveness Research

Abstract

The desire for patient-centeredness and more pragmatic clinical trials is increasing. Pragmatic clinical trials are conducted in normal practices to answer whether interventions work in real-world settings, whereas explanatory clinical trials are conducted under stricter settings with tighter control to answer whether an intervention can work. While both explanatory and pragmatic trials can have patient-centered elements, pragmatic trials more directly answer patient and policymaker questions.

To ensure trials are truly reflective of what is meaningful to patients, patients and stakeholders should be engaged during the entire trial process—from planning the trial through conducting the trial to disseminating the results. Identifying, recruiting, training, continually engaging, and compensating an advisory committee of patients and stakeholders to serve as a resource and guide through the trial process is one way to increase the patient-centeredness of a trial. Patients can help design recruitment and retention strategies, codevelop endpoints, review consent forms, and identify appropriate dissemination channels. Patient involvement throughout the trial benefits not only the research team but the patients themselves as well as future patients. This chapter explores how to increase patient-centeredness in clinical trials by engaging patients and stakeholders throughout the pragmatic clinical trial process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Methodology Committee of the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (2012) Methodological standards and patient-centeredness in comparative effectiveness research: The PCORI perspective. JAMA 307(15):1636–1640. doi:10.1001/jama.2012.466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Mullins CD, Vandigo J, Zheng Z, Wicks P (2014) Patient-centeredness in the design of clinical trials. Value Health 17(4):471–475. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2014.02.012

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Institute of Medicine (2012) Appendix D, Discussion Paper: The clinical trials enterprise in the United States: A call for disruptive innovation. In: Envisioning a transformed clinical trials enterprise in the United States: Establishing an agenda for 2020: Workshop summary. The National Academies Collection: Reports funded by National Institutes of Health. National Academies Press, Washington, DC. doi:10.17226/13345

  4. N. I. H. Collaboratory (2014) Introduction to pragmatic clinical trials. Updated December 1, 2014. Duke University. http://sites.duke.edu/rethinkingclinicaltrials/introduction-to-pragmatic-clinical-trials/. Accessed 2 May 2016

  5. Schwartz D, Lellouch J (1967) Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in therapeutical trials. J Chronic Dis 20(8):637–648

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Loudon K, Treweek S, Sullivan F, Donnan P, Thorpe KE, Zwarenstein M (2015) The PRECIS-2 tool: Designing trials that are fit for purpose. BMJ (Clin Res Ed) 350:h2147–h2147

    Google Scholar 

  7. Thorpe KE, Zwarenstein M, Oxman AD, Treweek S, Furberg CD, Altman DG, Tunis S, Bergel E, Harvey I, Magid DJ, Chalkidou K (2009) A pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary (PRECIS): A tool to help trial designers. J Clin Epidemiol 62(5):464–475. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.12.011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Rosenthal GE (2014) The role of pragmatic clinical trials in the evolution of learning health systems. Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc 125:204–216; discussion 217–208

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Zwarenstein M, Treweek S, Gagnier JJ, Altman DG, Tunis S, Haynes B, Oxman AD, Moher D, for the CONSORT and Pragmatic Trials in Healthcare (Practihc) groups (2008) Improving the reporting of pragmatic trials: An extension of the CONSORT statement. BMJ 337(4):a2390. doi:10.1136/bmj.a2390

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Freedman B (1987) Equipoise and the ethics of clinical research. N Engl J Med 317(3):141–145. doi:10.1056/NEJM198707163170304

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Patsopoulos NA (2011) A pragmatic view on pragmatic trials. Dialogues Clin Neurosci 13(2):217–224

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (2015) What we mean by engagement. Updated 12 Oct 2015. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. http://www.pcori.org/funding-opportunities/what-we-mean-engagement. Accessed 2 May 2016

  13. Mullins CD, Abdulhalim AM, Lavallee DC (2012) Continuous patient engagement in comparative effectiveness research. JAMA 307(15):1587–1588. doi:10.1001/jama.2012.442

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (2013) Introducing a new PCORI research funding initiative–large pragmatic clinical trials. Updated 18 Dec 2013. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. http://www.pcori.org/blog/introducing-new-pcori-research-funding-initiative-large-pragmatic-clinical-trials. Accessed 2 May 2016

  15. Lancaster KJ, Schoenthaler AM, Midberry SA, Watts SO, Nulty MR, Cole HV, Ige E, Chaplin W, Ogedegbe G (2014) Rationale and design of Faith-based Approaches in the Treatment of Hypertension (FAITH), a lifestyle intervention targeting blood pressure control among black church members. Am Heart J 167(3):301–307. doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2013.10.026

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Leone LA, Allicock M, Pignone MP, Walsh JF, Johnson LS, Armstrong-Brown J, Carr CC, Langford A, Ni A, Resnicow K, Campbell MK (2016) Cluster randomized trial of a church-based peer counselor and tailored newsletter intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening and physical activity among older African Americans. Health Educ Behav 43(5):568–76. doi:10.1177/1090198115611877

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. PCORI. Engagement rubric for applicants. http://www.pcori.org/sites/default/files/Engagement-Rubric.pdf.

  18. Hudson KL, Collins FS (2015) Sharing and reporting the results of clinical trials. JAMA 313(4):355–356. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.10716

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Deverka PA, Lavallee DC, Desai PJ, Esmail LC, Ramsey SD, Veenstra DL, Tunis SR (2012) Stakeholder participation in comparative effectiveness research: Defining a framework for effective engagement. J Comp Eff Res 1(2):181–194. doi:10.2217/cer.12.7

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Buckland S (1994) Unmet needs for health information: A literature review. Health Libr Rev 11(2):82–95

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Evans D, Coad J, Cottrell K, Dalrymple J, Davies R, Donald C, Laterza V, Long A, Longley A, Moule P, Pollard K, Powell J, Puddicombe A, Rice C, Sayers R (2014) Public involvement in research: Assessing impact through a realist evaluation. Health Services and Delivery Research. NIHR Journals Library Copyright (c) Queen’s Printer and Controller of HMSO 2014. doi:10.3310/hsdr02360

  22. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (2015) Financial compensation of patients, caregiver, and patient/caregiver organizations engaged in PCORI-funded research as engaged research partners. Updated June 10, 2015. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. http://www.pcori.org/sites/default/files/PCORI-Compensation-Framework-for-Engaged-Research-Partners.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2016

  23. Katz ML, Archer LE, Peppercorn JM, Kereakoglow S, Collyar DE, Burstein HJ, Schilsky RL, Partridge AH (2012) Patient advocates' role in clinical trials: Perspectives from cancer and leukemia group B investigators and advocates. Cancer 118(19):4801–4805. doi:10.1002/cncr.27485

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. National Heart LaBI (2016) ALLHAT: Quick reference for health care providers. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/allhat/qckref.htm. Accessed 2 May 2016

  25. Nallamothu BK, Hayward RA, Bates ER (2008) Beyond the randomized clinical trial: The role of effectiveness studies in evaluating cardiovascular therapies. Circulation 118(12):1294–1303. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.703579

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Shih MC, Turakhia M, Lai TL (2015) Innovative designs of point-of-care comparative effectiveness trials. Contemp Clin Trials 45(Pt A):61–68. doi:10.1016/j.cct.2015.06.014

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. PATIENTS Program at University of Maryland (2014) University of Maryland School of Pharmacy. http://patients.umaryland.edu/. Accessed 31 May 2016

  28. PatientsLikeMe (2016) PatientsLikeMe. https://www.patientslikeme.com/. Accessed 31 May 2016

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. Daniel Mullins .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hung, A., Baas, C., Bekelman, J., Fitz-Randolph, M., Daniel Mullins, C. (2017). Patient and Stakeholder Engagement in Designing Pragmatic Clinical Trials. In: Birnbaum, H., Greenberg, P. (eds) Decision Making in a World of Comparative Effectiveness Research. Adis, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3262-2_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3262-2_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Adis, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-3261-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-3262-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics