Decision aids for randomised controlled trials : a qualitative exploration of stakeholders' views

Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions. Funding: This work was supported by personal fellowship award (to KG) from the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Governments Health and Social Care Directorates, grant number [PDF/09/01]. The Health Services Research Unit is supported by a core grant from the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Strengthening the ethical assessment of placebo-controlled surgical trials : three proposals

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Determining information for inclusion in a decision-support intervention for clinical trial participation : A modified Delphi approach

Peer reviewedPostprin

Anonymity, veracity and power in online patient feedback : A quantitative and qualitative analysis of staff responses to patient comments on the ‘Care Opinion’ platform in Scotland

Funding: The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by NHS Grampian Endowments Fund (grant number 2018UA012).Peer reviewedPublisher PD

“The more you know, the more you realise it is really challenging to do”: tensions and uncertainties in person-centred support for people with long-term conditions

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We thank the health professionals who participated in this research and shared their experiences and insights. We thank Louise Cotterell and Bev Smith (Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen) for administrative and clerical support, Darshan Patel and colleagues at the Health Foundation for wonderfully facilitative research management, and NJC Secretarial for transcribing services. This study was funded by the Health Foundation (grant reference 7209). Health Foundation staff took part in one of the knowledge exchange discussions at the end of the project, but played no role in the analysis or writing of this manuscript, for which the authors take full responsibility.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Mental-physical multimorbidity treatment adherence challenges in Brazilian primary care : A qualitative study with patients and their healthcare providers

Acknowledgments We are greatful to all RDS-13 staff and patients without whom this study would not be possible. We would also like to thank Jennifer Jubileu, Sofia Madeira and Marcia Santos for conducting part of the interviews, and Professors Maria Lúcia Zanetti, Kelly Graziani Giacchero Vedana, and Pedro Fredemir Palha for their ongoing methodological advice Funding: The work of MR was funded by the Coordination of Superior Level Staff Improvement - Brazil (CAPES), through the Science without Borders Programme for Young Talent Attraction, Brazil (fellowship number: CSF-PAJT-88887.090476/2014-00). The work of CAO was funded by the CAPES (Finance Code 001).Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Behavioural optimisation to address trial conduct challenges : case study in the UK-REBOA trial

Acknowledgements We thank the UK-REBOA site staf for dedicating their time to be interviewedPeer reviewedPublisher PD

Development of a standardised set of metrics for monitoring site performance in multicentre randomised trials : a Delphi study

Funding This study was supported by an NIHR Clinical Trials Unit Support Funding grant for supporting efficient and innovative delivery of NIHR research. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the National Health Service, the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. The Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, receives core funding from the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health Directorates. The study was not registered. Availability of data and materials The data generated or analysed during the current study are included in this published article (and its supplementary information files). Additional information is available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

A centralised public information resource for randomised trials: a scoping study to explore desirability and feasibility

BACKGROUND: There are currently several concerns about the ways in which people are recruited to participate in randomised controlled trials, the low acceptance rates among people invited to participate, and the experiences of trial participants. An information resource about on-going clinical trials designed for potential and current participants could help overcome some of these problems. METHODS: We carried out a scoping exercise to explore the desirability and feasibility of establishing such a resource. We sought the views of a range of people including people who were considering taking part in a trial, current trial participants, people who had been asked but refused to participate in a trial, consumer group representatives and researchers who design and conduct trials. RESULTS: There was broad-based support for the concept of a centralised information resource for members of the public about on-going and recently completed clinical trials. Such an information resource could be based on a database containing standardised information for each trial relating to the purpose of the trial; the interventions being compared; the implications of participation for participants; and features indicative of scientific quality and ethical probity. The usefulness of the database could be enhanced if its search facility could allow people to enter criteria such as a disease and geographic area and be presented with all the trials relevant to them, and if optional display formats could allow them to view information in varying levels of detail. Access via the Internet was considered desirable, with complementary supported access via health information services. The development of such a resource is technically feasible, but the collation of the required information would take a significant investment of resources. CONCLUSION: A centralised participant oriented information resource about clinical trials could serve several purposes. A more detailed investigation of its feasibility and exploration of its potential impacts are required

Patient information leaflets (PILs) for UK randomised controlled trials : a feasibility study exploring whether they contain information to support decision making about trial participation

Peer reviewedPublisher PD