A maturity model for the scientific review of clinical trial designs and their informativeness.
Trials
; 25(1): 271, 2024 Apr 19.
Article
en En
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-38641848
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND:
Informativeness, in the context of clinical trials, defines whether a study's results definitively answer its research questions with meaningful next steps. Many clinical trials end uninformatively. Clinical trial protocols are required to go through reviews in regulatory and ethical domains areas that focus on specifics outside of trial design, biostatistics, and research methods. Private foundations and government funders rarely require focused scientific design reviews for these areas. There are no documented standards and processes, or even best practices, toward a capability for funders to perform scientific design reviews after their peer review process prior to a funding commitment. MAIN BODY Considering the investment in and standardization of ethical and regulatory reviews, and the prevalence of studies never finishing or failing to provide definitive results, it may be that scientific reviews of trial designs with a focus on informativeness offer the best chance for improved outcomes and return-on-investment in clinical trials. A maturity model is a helpful tool for knowledge transfer to help grow capabilities in a new area or for those looking to perform a self-assessment in an existing area. Such a model is offered for scientific design reviews of clinical trial protocols. This maturity model includes 11 process areas and 5 maturity levels. Each of the 55 process area levels is populated with descriptions on a continuum toward an optimal state to improve trial protocols in the areas of risk of failure or uninformativeness.CONCLUSION:
This tool allows for prescriptive guidance on next investments to improve attributes of post-funding reviews of trials, with a focus on informativeness. Traditional pre-funding peer review has limited capacity for trial design review, especially for detailed biostatistical and methodological review. Select non-industry funders have begun to explore or invest in post-funding review programs of grantee protocols, based on exemplars of such programs. Funders with a desire to meet fiduciary responsibilities and mission goals can use the described model to enhance efforts supporting trial participant commitment and faster cures.Palabras clave
Texto completo:
1
Colección:
01-internacional
Base de datos:
MEDLINE
Asunto principal:
Proyectos de Investigación
Límite:
Humans
Idioma:
En
Revista:
Trials
Asunto de la revista:
MEDICINA
/
TERAPEUTICA
Año:
2024
Tipo del documento:
Article
País de afiliación:
Estados Unidos
Pais de publicación:
Reino Unido