Exploring the ethical and regulatory issues in pragmatic clinical trials

Clinical Trials

Volumn 12, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 436-441

  Califf, Robert M ^a,d   Sugarman, Jeremy ^b,c  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^d CENTER FOR DRUG EVALUATION AND RESEARCH   (United States)

Author keywords

Clinical trials; cluster randomized trial; ethics; evidence based medicine; learning health care system; patient centered outcomes research; pragmatic clinical trial

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; CLINICAL STUDY; DECISION MAKING; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HUMAN; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROFESSIONAL STANDARD; PUBLISHING; RESEARCH ETHICS; STUDY DESIGN; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); ETHICS; LEGISLATION AND JURISPRUDENCE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; METHODOLOGY; NATIONAL HEALTH ORGANIZATION; QUESTIONNAIRE; STANDARDS; UNITED STATES;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH (U.S.); RESEARCH DESIGN; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84942932829     PISSN: 17407745     EISSN: 17407753     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1740774515598334     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Tricoci P, Allen JM, Kramer JM, et al. Scientific evidence underlying the ACC/AHA clinical practice guidelines. JAMA 2009; 301: 831-841.
2. Wright JD, Pawar N, Gonzalez JS, et al. Scientific evidence underlying the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists practice bulletins. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 118: 505-512.
3. Koh C, Zhao X, Samala N, et al. AASLD clinical practice guidelines: a critical review of scientific evidence and evolving recommendations. Hepatology 2013; 58: 2142-2152.
4. Neuman MD, Goldstein JN, Cirullo MA, et al. Durability of class I American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association clinical practice guideline recommendations. JAMA 2014; 311: 2092-2100.
5. Roos M, Brodbeck J, Sarkozy A, et al. A critical analysis of the scientific evidence behind international guidelines related to cardiac arrhythmias. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2011; 4: 202-210.
6. Feuerstein JD, Akbari M, Gifford AE, et al. Systematic analysis underlying the quality of the scientific evidence and conflicts of interest in interventional medicine subspecialty guidelines. Mayo Clin Proc 2014; 89: 16-24.
7. Califf RM, Zarin DA, Kramer JM, et al. Characteristics of clinical trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, 2007-2010. JAMA 2012; 307: 1838-1847.
8. Institute of Medicine. Roundtable on Evidence-Based Medicine. The learning healthcare system: workshop summary (ed Olsen LA, Aisner D, McGinnis JM,). Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2007.
9. Dewitt JG, Hampton PM,. Development of a data warehouse at an academic health system: knowing a place for the first time. Acad Med 2005; 80: 1019-1025.
10. Chute CG, Beck SA, Fisk TB, et al. The Enterprise Data Trust at Mayo Clinic: a semantically integrated warehouse of biomedical data. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2010; 17: 131-135.
11. Behrman RE, Benner JS, Brown JS, et al. Developing the Sentinel System-a national resource for evidence development. N Engl J Med 2011; 364: 498-499.
12. PROMIS.org. About PROMIS, http://www.nihpromis.org/about/abouthome (. accessed 30 December 2014).
13. Pew Research Internet Project. Health fact sheet., http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheets/health-fact-sheet/ (2014,. accessed 30 December 2014).
14. Nallamothu BK, Hayward RA, Bates ER,. Beyond the randomized clinical trial: the role of effectiveness studies in evaluating cardiovascular therapies. Circulation 2008; 118: 1294-1303.
15. Krumholz HM, Wang Y, Chen J, et al. Reduction in acute myocardial infarction mortality in the United States: risk-standardized mortality rates from 1995-2006. JAMA 2009; 302: 767-773.
16. Cystic Fibrosis Foundation Patient Registry. Median predicted survival age, 1985-2006. In: 2006 annual data report to the center directors. Bethesda, MD: Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, 2007.
17. OLeary M, Krailo M, Anderson JR, et al. Progress in childhood cancer: 50 years of research collaboration, a report from the Childrens Oncology Group. Semin Oncol 2008; 35: 484-493.
18. Califf RM, DeMets DL,. Principles from clinical trials relevant to clinical practice: part I. Circulation 2002; 106: 1015-1021.
19. Califf RM, DeMets DL,. Principles from clinical trials relevant to clinical practice: part II. Circulation 2002; 106: 1172-1175.
20. DeMets DL, Califf RM,. Lessons learned from recent cardiovascular clinical trials: part I. Circulation 2002; 106: 746-751.
21. DeMets DL, Califf RM,. Lessons learned from recent cardiovascular clinical trials: part II. Circulation 2002; 106: 880-886.
22. US Food and Drug Administration. FDAs Sentinel Initiative., http://www.fda.gov/Safety/FDAsSentinelInitiative/ucm2007250.htm (2014,. accessed 30 December 2014).
23. Rosati K, Evans B, McGraw D, for the Mini-Sentinel Privacy Panel. HIPAA and Common Rule compliance in the Mini-Sentinel pilot., http://www.mini-sentinel.org/work-products/About-Us/HIPAA-and-CommonRuleCompliance-in-the-Mini-SentinelPilot.pdf (. accessed 30 December 2014).
24. Schwartz D, Lellouch J,. Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in therapeutical trials. J Chronic Dis 1967; 20: 637-648.
25. Yusuf S, Collins R, Peto R,. Why do we need some large, simple randomized trials? Stat Med 1984; 3: 409-422.
26. 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: 1624-1632.
27. 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: 464-475.
28. Department of Health and Human Services. Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research (The Belmont Report)., http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/belmont.html (1979,. accessed 30 December 2014).
29. Kass NE, Faden RR, Goodman SN, et al. The research-treatment distinction: a problematic approach for determining which activities should have ethical oversight. Hastings Cent Rep 2013; 43: S4-S15.
30. NIH Health Care Systems Research Collaboratory. Knowledge repository: demonstration project regulatory and ethics support documentation., https://www.nihcollaboratory.org/demonstration-projects/Pages/regulatory-ethics.aspx (. accessed 1 January 2015).
31. NIH Health Care Systems Research Collaboratory. Cores and working groups: Ethics/Regulatory Core., https://www.nihcollaboratory.org/cores/Pages/Regulatory-Ethics.aspx (. accessed 1 January 2015).
32. National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet). Task forces., http://www.pcornet.org/task-forces/ (. accessed 1 January 2015).
33. Sugarman J, Califf RM,. Ethics and regulatory complexities for pragmatic clinical trials. JAMA 2014; 311: 2381-2382.
34. Anderson ML, Califf RM, Sugarman J,. Ethical and regulatory issues of pragmatic cluster randomized trials in contemporary health systems. Clin Trials 2015; 12: 276-286.
35. Whicher DM, Miller JE, Dunham KM, et al. Gatekeepers for pragmatic clinical trials. Clin Trials 2015; 12: 442-448.
36. ORourke PP, Carrithers J, Patrick-Lake B, et al. Harmonization and streamlining of research oversight for pragmatic clinical trials. Clin Trials, 2015; 12: 449-456.
37. Finkelstein JA, Brickman AL, Capron A, et al. Oversight on the borderline: quality improvement and pragmatic research. Clin Trials, 2015; 12: 457-466.
38. Ali J, Andrews JE Jr, Somkin CP, et al. Harms, benefits, and the nature of interventions in pragmatic clinical trials. Clin Trials, 2015; 12: 467-475.
39. Smalley JB, Merritt MW, Al-Khatib SM, et al. Ethical responsibilities toward indirect and collateral participants in pragmatic clinical trials. Clin Trials, 2015; 12: 476-484.
40. Lantos JD, Wendler D, Septimus E, et al. Considerations in the evaluation and determination of minimal risk in pragmatic clinical trials. Clin Trials, 2015; 12: 485-493.
41. McKinney RE Jr, Beskow LM, Ford DE, et al. Use of altered informed consent in pragmatic clinical research. Clin Trials, 2015; 12: 494-502.
42. Welch MJ, Lally R, Miller JE, et al. The ethics and regulatory landscape of including vulnerable populations in pragmatic clinical trials. Clin Trials, 2015; 12: 503-510.
43. Anderson ML, Griffin J, Goldkind SF, et al. The Food and Drug Administration and pragmatic clinical trials of marketed medical products. Clin Trials, 2015; 12: 511-519.
44. McGraw D, Greene SM, Miner CS, et al. Privacy and confidentiality in pragmatic clinical trials. Clin Trials, 2015; 12: 520-529.
45. Ellenberg SS, Culbertson R, Gillen DL, et al. Data monitoring committees for pragmatic clinical trials. Clin Trials, 2015; 12: 530-536.
46. Weijer C, Grimshaw JM, Eccles MP, et al. The Ottawa Statement on the ethical design and conduct of cluster randomized trials. PLoS Med 2012; 9: e1001346.