The role for pragmatic randomized controlled trials (pRCTs) in comparative effectiveness research

Clinical Trials

Volumn 9, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 436-446

  Chalkidou, Kalipso ^a   Tunis, Sean ^b   Whicher, Danielle ^b   Fowler, Robert ^c   Zwarenstein, Merrick ^c  

^a NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH AND CARE EXCELLENCE   (United Kingdom)

^b Center for Medical Technology Policy   (United States)

^c SUNNYBROOK RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

SPIRONOLACTONE;

CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL EVALUATION; CLINICAL RESEARCH; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; COST; DIABETES MELLITUS; DRUG EFFICACY; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; INTERNAL VALIDITY; NON PROFIT ORGANIZATION; PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REVIEW; THORAX PAIN;

COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH; ETHICS COMMITTEES, RESEARCH; HEALTH POLICY; MULTICENTER STUDIES AS TOPIC; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN; RESEARCH SUPPORT AS TOPIC; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84865497470     PISSN: 17407745     EISSN: 17407753     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1740774512450097     Document Type: Review

References (75)

1. Tricoci P, Allen JM, Kramer JM, Califf RM, Smith SC. Scientific evidence underlying the ACC/AHA clinical practice guidelines. JAMA. 2009 ; 301 (8). 831-41
2. Masoudi FA, Havranek EP, Wolfe P. Most hospitalized older persons do not meet the enrolment criteria for clinical trials in heart failure. et al Am Heart J. 2003 ; 146: 250-57
3. Travers J, Marsh S, Williams M. External validity of randomised controlled trials in asthma: To whom do the results of the trials apply?. et al Thorax. 2007 ; 62: 219-23
4. Sox HC, Greenfield S. Comparative effectiveness research. A report from the Institute of Medicine. Ann Intern Med. 2009 ; 151: 203-05
5. Sox H, Helfand M, Grimshaw J. Comparative effectiveness research: Challenges for medical journals. et al PLoS Med. 2010 ; 6: e1000269
6. Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute. About PCORI. Available at: http://www.pcori.org/ (accessed 26 May 2011).
7. Califf RM, Woodlief LH. Pragmatic and mechanistic trials. Eur Heart J. 1997 ; 18: 367-70
8. Roland M, Torgerson DJ. What are pragmatic trials?. BMJ. 1998 ; 316: 285
9. Ware JH, Hamel MB. Pragmatic trials-guides to better patient care?. N Engl J Med. 2011 ; 364: 1685-87
10. Tunis SR, Stryer DB, Clancy CM. Practical clinical trials: Increasing the value of clinical research for decision making in clinical and health policy. JAMA. 2003 ; 290: 1624-32
11. Glasgow RE, Magid DJ, Beck A, Ritzwoller D, Estabrooks PA. Practical clinical trials for translating research to practice: Design and measurement recommendations. Med Care. 2005 ; 43: 551-57
12. Peto R, Collins R, Gray R. Large-scale randomized evidence: Large, simple trials and overviews of trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 1995 ; 48: 23-40
13. Yusuf S, Collins R, Peto R. Why do we need some large, simple randomized trials?. Stat Med. 1984 ; 3: 409-22
14. Freemantle N, Blonde L, Bolinder B. Real-world trials to answer real-world questions. et al Pharmacoeconomics. 2005 ; 23: 747-54
15. Haynes RB, Sackett DL, Guyatt GH, Tugwell P Clinical Epidemiology: How to Do Clinical Practice Research. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins ; 2005 :
16. Bauer MS, Williford WO, Dawson EE, et al. Principles of effectiveness trials and their implementation in VA Cooperative Study #430: 'Reducing the efficacy-effectiveness gap in bipolar disorder'. J Affect Disord. 2001 ; 67: 61-78
17. Gartlehner G, Hansen RA, Nissman D, Lohr KN, Carey TS. A simple and valid tool distinguished efficacy from effectiveness studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006 ; 59: 1040-48
18. Schwartz D, Lellouch J. Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in therapeutical trials. J Chronic Dis. 1967 ; 20: 637-48
19. Zwarenstein M, Treweek S, Gagnier JJ, et al. Improving the reporting of pragmatic trials: An extension of the CONSORT statement. BMJ. 2008 ; 337: a2390
20. Thorpe KE, Zwarenstein M, Oxman AD, et al. A pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary (PRECIS): A tool to help trial designers. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 ; 62: 464-75
21. Methodical standards and patient-centeredness in comparative effectiveness research: The PCORI perspective. JAMA. 2012 ; 307 (15). 1636-40
22. Pitt B, Zannad F, Remme WJ, et al. The effect of spironolactone on morbidity and mortality in patients with severe health failure. N Engl J Med. 1999 ; 341: 709-17
23. Juurlink DN, Mamdani MM, Lee DS, et al. Rates of hyperkalemia after publication of the Randomized Aldactone Evaluation Study. N Engl J Med. 2004 ; 351: 543-51
24. Bombardier C, Laine L, Reicin A, et al. Comparison of upper gastrointestinal toxicity of rofecoxib and naproxenin patients with rheumatoid arthritis. N Engl J Med. 2000 ; 343: 1520-28
25. Bresalier RS, Sandler RS, Quan H, et al. Cardiovascular events associated with Rofecoxib in a Colorectal Adenoma Chemoprevention Trial. N Engl J Med. 2005 ; 352: 1092-102
26. Mamdani M, Rochon PA, Juurlink DN, et al. Observational study of upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage in elderly patients given selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors or conventional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. BMJ. 2002 ; 325: 624
27. Mamdani M, Warren L, Kopp A, et al. Changes in rates of upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage after the introduction of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors in British Columbia and Ontario. CMAJ. 2006 ; 175 (12). 1535-38
28. National Institutes of Health. Project information-NIH RePORTER-NIH research portfolio online reporting tools expenditures and results (homepage on the Internet). Available at: http://projectreporter.nih.gov/project-description. cfm?projectnumber=1R01HL098237-01 (accessed 21 July 2010).
29. Nathan DM, Cleary PA, Backlund JY, et al. Intensive diabetes treatment and cardiovascular disease in patients with type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2005 ; 353: 2643-53
30. Schneeweiss S, Seeger JD, Landon J, Walker AM. Aprotinin during coronary-artery bypass grafting and risk of death. NEJM. 2008 ; 358: 771-83
31. Schneeweiss S, Solomon DH, Wang PS, Brookhart MA. Simultaneous assessment of short-term gastrointestinal benefits and cardiovascular risks of selective COX-2 inhibitors and non-selective NSAIDs: An instrumental variable analysis. Arthritis Rheum. 2006 ; 54: 3390-98
32. Registries for Evaluating Patient Outcomes: A User's Guide (Prepared by Outcome DEcIDE Center (Outcome Sciences, Inc. dba Outcome) Under Contract No. HHSA29020050035ITO1). Gliklich RE Dreyer NA, ed. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality ; 2007 :
33. Luce BR, Kramer JM, Goodman SN, et al. Rethinking randomized clinical trials for comparative effectiveness research: The need for transformational change. Ann Intern Med. 2009 ; 151 (3). 206-09
34. OlsenLMcGinnisJM, Roundtable on Value & Science-Driven Health Care, Institute of Medicine. Redesigning the Clinical Effectiveness Research Paradigm: Innovation and Practice-Based Approaches: Workshop Summary. The National Academies Press, 2010. Available at: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record-id= 12197#toc (accessed 26 May 2011).
35. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. NCD for computed tomography (220.1). 2008. Available at: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/mcd/viewncd.asp?ncd-id=220. 1&;ncd-version=2&basket=ncd%3A220%2E1%3A2%3AComputed+Tomography (accessed 25 November 2009).
36. Wulff KP, Miller FG, Pearson SD. Can coverage be rescinded when negative trial results threaten a popular procedure? The ongoing saga of vertebroplasty. Health Aff. 2011 ; 30 (12). 2269-76
37. Chalkidou K, Andrew Hoy , Littlejohns P. Making a decision to wait for more evidence: When the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence recommends a technology only in the context of research. J R Soc Med. 2007 ; 100: 453-60
38. Chalkidou K, Walley T. Using comparative effectiveness research to inform policy and practice in the British NHS: Past, present, and future. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010 ; 28 (10). 1-13
39. Tunis SR, Chalkidou K. Coverage with evidence development: A very good beginning, but much to be done. Commentary to Hutton et al. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2007 ; 23: 432-35
40. Chalkidou K, Walley T, Culyer A, Littlejohns P, Hoy A. Evidence-informed evidence-making. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2008 ; 13: 167-73
41. The Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry. The pharmaceutical price and regulation scheme 2009, March2008. Available at: http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod-consum-dh/groups/dh-digitalassets/documents/ digitalasset/dh-098498.pdf (accessed 7 December 2009).
42. Whicher DM, Chalkidou K, Dhalla IA, Levin L, Tunis S. Comparative effectiveness research in Ontario, Canada: Producing relevant and timely information for health care decision makers. Milbank Q. 2009 ; 87: 585-606
43. Maclure M, Carleton B, Schneeweiss S. Designed delays versus rigorous pragmatic trials: Lower carat gold standards can produce relevant drug evaluations. Med Care. 2007 ; 45: S44 - S49
44. Center for Medical Technology Policy. Issue brief: Coverage for evidence development: A conceptual framework, January2009. Available at: http://www.cmtpnet.org/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2012/03/CED-Issue-Brief.pdf (accessed 7 December 2009).
45. Department of Veterans Affairs. VA Cooperative Studies Program (CSP), October2011. Available at: http://www.research.va.gov/programs/csp/ (accessed 16 April 2012).
46. AHRQ Practice-Based Research Networks (PBRNs). Fact sheet June 2001 (revised May 2006). AHRQ Publication No. 01-P020. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. Available at: http://www.ahrq.gov/research/pbrn/ pbrnfact.htm (accessed 25 November 2009).
47. Marks RG, Conlon M, Ruberg SJ. Paradigm shifts in clinical trials enabled by information technology. Stat Med. 2001 ; 20: 2683-96
48. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Distributed Ambulatory Research in Therapeutics Network (DARTNet). Summary report, July2009. Available at: http://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/index.cfm/search-for-guides-reviews- and-reports/?pageaction=displayproduct&productID=151#1182 (accessed 26 May 2011).
49. Envisioning a Transformed Clinical Trials Enterprise in the United States: Establishing an Agenda for 2020. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press ; 2012 :
50. Platt R, Takvorian SU, Septimus E, et al. Cluster randomized trials in comparative effectiveness research: Randomizing hospitals to test methods for prevention of healthcare-associated infections. Med Care. 2010 ; 48: S52 - S57
51. Scales DC, Dainty K, Hales B, et al. A multifaceted intervention for quality improvement in a network of intensive care units. JAMA. 2011 ;:
52. Institute of Medicine. Initial national priorities for comparative effectiveness research: Report brief, June2009. Available at: http://www.iom.edu/~/media/Files/Report%20Files/2009/ ComparativeEffectivenessResearchPriorities/CER%20report%20brief%2008-13-09.ashx (accessed 15 July 2010).
53. Davis BR, Cutler JA, Gordon DJ, et al. Rationale and design for the Antihypertensive and Lipid Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT). ALLHAT Research Group. Am J Hypertens. 1996 ; 9: 342-60
54. An international randomized trial comparing four thrombolytic strategies for acute myocardial infarction. The GUSTO investigators. N Engl J Med. 1993 ; 329: 673-82
55. Randomised trial of intravenous streptokinase, oral aspirin, both, or neither among 17,187 cases of suspected acute myocardial infarction: ISIS-2. Lancet. 1988 ; 2: 349-60
56. Altman D, Carroli G, Duley L, et al. Do women with pre-eclampsia, and their babies, benefit from magnesium sulphate? The Magpie Trial: A randomized placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2002 ; 359 (9321). 1877-90
57. National Cancer Institute. Surveillance epidemiology and end results. Available at: http://seer.cancer.gov/ (accessed 25 November 2009).
58. InFACT: A global critical care research response to H1N1. Lancet. 2009 ;:
59. A National Cancer Clinical Trials System for the 21st Century: Reinvigorating the NCI Cooperative Group Program. Washington, DC: National Academies Press ; 2010 :
60. Savulescu J, Chalmers I, Blunt J. Are research ethics committees behaving unethically? Some suggestions for improving performance and accountability. BMJ. 1996 ; 313: 1390-93
61. Academy of Medical Sciences. A new pathway for the regulation and governance of health research, January2011. Available at: http://www.acmedsci. ac.uk/p118pressid77.html (accessed 27 May 2011).
62. ZakaibGD. Expert panel calls for reform in human subject protection. Nature Blog2011. Available at: http://blogs.nature.com/news/2011/05/panel-calls- for-reform-in-huma.html (accessed 26 May 2011).
63. Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative. Use of IRBs for multicenter clinical trials: Background. Available at: http://www.ctti-clinicaltrials.org/ project-topics/study-start-up/use-of-central-irbs-for-multiple-center-clinical- trials/background (accessed 16 April 2012).
64. Hemminki E. Research ethics committees: Agents of research policy?. Health Res Policy Syst. 2005 ; 3: 6
65. Duley L, Antman K, Arena J, et al. Specific barriers to the conduct of randomized trials. Clin Trials. 2008 ; 5 (1). 40-48
66. Yusuf S, Bosch J, Devereaux PJ, et al. Sensible guidelines for the conduct of large randomized trials. Clin Trials. 2008 ; 5 (1). 38-39
67. Olsen LW, Aisner D, McGinnis JM Roundtable on Evidence-Based Medicine. The Learning Healthcare System: Workshop Summary (IOM Roundtable on Evidence-Based Medicine). Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine ; 2007 :
68. Kass N, Faden R, Tunis S. Addressing Low-Risk Comparative Effectiveness Research in Proposed Changes to US Federal Regulations Governing Research. JAMA. 2012 ; 307 (15). 1589-1590
69. Vickers AJ, Scardino PT. The clinically-integrated randomized trial: Proposed novel method for conducting large trials at low cost. Trial. 2009 ; 10: 14-21
70. D'Avolio L, Ferguson R, Goryachev S, et al. Implementation of the Department of Veterans Affairs' first point-of-care clinical trial. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2012 ;:
71. Deverka PA, Lavallee DC, Desai PJ, et al. Stakeholder participation in comparative effectiveness research: Defining a framework for effective engagement. J Comp Eff Res. 2012 ; 1 (2). 181-94
72. BaschEAbernethyAMullinsCDSpencerM. Effectiveness guidance document: Recommendations for incorporating patient-reported outcomes into the design of clinical trials in adult oncology. Center for Medical Technology Policy, 2011. Available at: http://www.cmtpnet.org/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2012/02/PRO- EGD-for-Public-Comment.pdf (accessed 16 April 2012).
73. Henshall C, Mardhani-Bayne L, Fronsdal KB, Klemp M. Interactions between health technology assessment, coverage, and regulatory processes: Emerging issues, goals, and opportunities. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2011 ; 27 (3). 253-60
74. Department of Health and Human Services. NIH health care systems research collaboratory-Pragmatic clinical trials demonstration projects (UH2/UH3). Available at: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-12-002.html (accessed 16 April 2012).
75. Department of Health and Human Services. NIH health care systems research collaboratory-Coordinating center (U54). Available at: http://grants.nih.gov/ grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-11-021.html (accessed 16 April 2012).