Think twice before starting a new trial; what is the impact of recommendations to stop doing new trials?

ObjectivesIn evidence-based medicine, we base our conclusions on the effectiveness of interventions on the results of high-quality meta-analysis. If a new randomized controlled trial (RCT) is unlikely to change the pooled effect estimate, conducting the new trial is a waste of resources. We evaluated whether recommendations not to conduct further RCTs reduced the number of trials registered for two scenarios.MethodsAnalysis of registered trials on the World Health Organisation (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We regarded trial protocols relevant if they evaluated the effectiveness of (1) exercise for chronic low back pain (LBP) and (2) cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for chronic pain. We calculated absolute and relative numbers and change of registered trials in a pre-set time window before and after publication of the recommendations, both published in 2012.ResultsWe found 1,574 trials registered in the WHO trial registry for exercise in LBP (459 before 2012; 1,115 after) and 5,037 trials on chronic pain (1,564 before 2012; 3,473 after). Before 2012, 13 trials on exercise for LBP (out of 459) fit the selection criteria, compared to 42 trials (out of 1,115) after, which represents a relative increase of 33%. Twelve trials (out of 1,564) regarding CBT for chronic pain, fit the selection criteria before 2012 and 18 trials (out of 3,473) after, representing a relative decrease of 32%. We found that visibility, media exposure and strength of the recommendation were related to a decrease in registered trials.ConclusionsRecommendations not to conduct further RCTs might reduce the number of trials registered if these recommendations are strongly worded and combined with social media attention

What you wear does not affect the credibility of your treatment: A blinded randomized controlled study

© 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd Objective Professional appearance is easily modifiable, and might alter the effects of a clinical encounter. We aimed to determine whether professional attire influences a patient's perception of treatment credibility. Methods We performed a single-blind randomized controlled study on 128 patients with acute non-specific low back pain who were about to receive treatment in primary care. The treating clinician was randomly allocated to wear formal attire (experimental condition) or casual attire (control condition) to the consultation. Clinicians provided a standardized briefing on the rationale behind the patient's forthcoming treatment. Treatment credibility (Credibility and Expectancy Questionnaire) was assessed immediately after this briefing. Results All patients received the experimental or control condition as allocated and provided complete primary outcome data. Formal attire had no effect on perceived treatment credibility (Mean difference between groups 1.2 [95%CI-1.1 to 3.5]). Age was the only significant predictor of treatment credibility; older patients rated treatment credibility higher (Beta = 0.16 [95%CI 0.08 to 0.24]). Conclusion In a trial setting, whether or not a clinician is formally dressed has no effect on perceptions of treatment credibility in patients with acute low back pain. Practice implication Clinicians should dress comfortably without fear of losing credibility

Pain education for adolescents and young adults living beyond cancer: An interdisciplinary meeting report

© Copyright 2019, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers 2019. Pain is an understudied and undertreated consequence of cancer survival. Pain education is now a recommended treatment approach for persistent non-cancer pain, yet it has not been well applied to the context of adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer survival. In March 2018, an interdisciplinary meeting was held in Adelaide, South Australia to set a research agenda for pain education in AYA cancer survivors. We identified that AYAs with persistent pain and those with heightened pain-related fear have the potential to benefit from pain education. We identified a number of unique challenges of engaging AYA survivors in pain education, and point towards future research directions

Effect of Intensive Patient Education vs Placebo Patient Education on Outcomes in Patients with Acute Low Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial

© 2018 2018 American Medical Association. All rights reserved. Importance: Many patients with acute low back pain do not recover with basic first-line care (advice, reassurance, and simple analgesia, if necessary). It is unclear whether intensive patient education improves clinical outcomes for those patients already receiving first-line care. Objective: To determine the effectiveness of intensive patient education for patients with acute low back pain. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial recruited patients from general practices, physiotherapy clinics, and a research center in Sydney, Australia, between September 10, 2013, and December 2, 2015. Trial follow-up was completed in December 17, 2016. Primary care practitioners invited 618 patients presenting with acute low back pain to participate. Researchers excluded 416 potential participants. All of the 202 eligible participants had low back pain of fewer than 6 weeks' duration and a high risk of developing chronic low back pain according to Predicting the Inception of Chronic Pain (PICKUP) Tool, a validated prognostic model. Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either patient education or placebo patient education. Interventions: All participants received recommended first-line care for acute low back pain from their usual practitioner. Participants received additional 2 × 1-hour sessions of patient education (information on pain and biopsychosocial contributors plus self-management techniques, such as remaining active and pacing) or placebo patient education (active listening, without information or advice). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was pain intensity (11-point numeric rating scale) at 3 months. Secondary outcomes included disability (24-point Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire) at 1 week, and at 3, 6, and 12 months. Results: Of 202 participants randomized for the trial, the mean (SD) age of participants was 45 (14.5) years and 103 (51.0%) were female. Retention rates were greater than 90% at all time points. Intensive patient education was not more effective than placebo patient education at reducing pain intensity (3-month mean [SD] pain intensity: 2.1 [2.4] vs 2.4 [2.2]; mean difference at 3 months, -0.3 [95% CI, -1.0 to 0.3]). There was a small effect of intensive patient education on the secondary outcome of disability at 1 week (mean difference, -1.6 points on a 24-point scale [95% CI, -3.1 to -0.1]) and 3 months (mean difference, -1.7 points, [95% CI, -3.2 to -0.2]) but not at 6 or 12 months. Conclusions and Relevance: Adding 2 hours of patient education to recommended first-line care for patients with acute low back pain did not improve pain outcomes. Clinical guideline recommendations to provide complex and intensive support to high-risk patients with acute low back pain may have been premature. Trial Registration: Australian Clinical Trial Registration Number: 12612001180808

Development and measurement properties of the AxEL (attitude toward education and advice for low-back-pain) questionnaire

Introduction: Clinician time and resources may be underutilised if the treatment they offer does not match patient expectations and attitudes. We developed a questionnaire (AxEL-Q) to guide clinicians toward elements of first-line care that are pertinent to their patients with low back pain. Methods: We used guidance from the COSMIN consortium to develop the questionnaire and evaluated it in a sample of people with low back pain of any duration. Participants were recruited from the community, were over 18 years and fluent in English. Statements that represented first-line care were identified. Semantic scales were used to measure attitude towards these statements. These items were combined to develop the questionnaire draft. Construct validity was evaluated with exploratory factor analysis and hypotheses testing, comparing to the Back Beliefs Questionnaire and modified Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire. Reliability was evaluated and floor and ceiling effects calculated. Results: We recruited 345 participants, and had complete data for analysis for 313 participants. The questionnaire draft was reduced to a 3-Factor questionnaire through exploratory factor analysis. Factor 1 comprised 9 items and evaluated Attitude toward staying active, Factor 2 comprised 4 items and evaluated Attitude toward low back pain being rarely caused by a serious health problem, Factor 3 comprised 4 items and evaluated Attitude toward not needing to know the cause of back pain to manage it effectively. There was a strong inverse association between each factor and the Back Beliefs Questionnaire and a moderate positive association with the modified Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire. Each independent factor demonstrated acceptable internal consistency; Cronbach α Factor 1 = 0.92, Factor 2 = 0.91, Factor 3 = 0.90 and adequate interclass correlation coefficients; Factor 1 = 0.71, Factor 2 = 0.73, Factor 3 = 0.79. Conclusion: This study demonstrates acceptable construct validity and reliability of the AxEL-Q, providing clinicians with an insight into the likelihood of patients following first-line care at the outset

Feasibility of an Audit and Feedback Intervention to Facilitate Journal Policy Change Towards Greater Promotion of Transparency and Openness in Sports Science Research

Objectives: To evaluate (1) the feasibility of an audit-feedback intervention to facilitate sports science journal policy change, (2) the reliability of the Transparency of Research Underpinning Social Intervention Tiers (TRUST) policy evaluation form, and (3) the extent to which policies of sports science journals support transparent and open research practices. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional, audit-feedback, feasibility study of transparency and openness standards of the top 38 sports science journals by impact factor. The TRUST form was used to evaluate journal policies support for transparent and open research practices. Feedback was provided to journal editors in the format of a tailored letter. Inter-rater reliability and agreement of the TRUST form was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients and the standard error of measurement, respectively. Time-based criteria, fidelity of intervention delivery and qualitative feedback were used to determine feasibility. Results: The audit-feedback intervention was feasible based on the time taken to rate journals and provide tailored feedback. The mean (SD) score on the TRUST form (range 0–27) was 2.05 (1.99), reflecting low engagement with transparent and open practices. Inter-rater reliability of the overall score of the TRUST form was moderate [ICC (2,1) = 0.68 (95% CI 0.55–0.79)], with standard error of measurement of 1.17. However, some individual items had poor reliability. Conclusion: Policies of the top 38 sports science journals have potential for improved support for transparent and open research practices. The feasible audit-feedback intervention developed here warrants large-scale evaluation as a means to facilitate change in journal policies. Registration: OSF (https://osf.io/d2t4s/)

Comparison between 2000 and 2018 on the reporting of statistical significance and clinical relevance in physiotherapy clinical trials in six major physiotherapy journals: a meta-research design

DesignMeta-research.ObjectiveTo compare the prevalence of reporting p values, effect estimates and clinical relevance in physiotherapy randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in the years 2000 and 2018.MethodsWe performed a meta-research study of physiotherapy RCTs obtained from six major physiotherapy peer-reviewed journals that were published in the years 2000 and 2018. We searched the databases Embase, Medline and PubMed in May 2019, and extracted data on the study characteristics and whether articles reported on statistical significance, effect estimates and confidence intervals for baseline, between-group, and within-group differences, and clinical relevance. Data were presented using descriptive statistics and inferences were made based on proportions. A 20% difference between 2000 and 2018 was regarded as a meaningful difference.ResultsWe found 140 RCTs: 39 were published in 2000 and 101 in 2018. Overall, there was a high prevalence (>90%) of reporting p values for the main (between-group) analysis, with no difference between years. Statistical significance testing was frequently used for evaluating baseline differences, increasing from 28% in 2000 to 61.4% in 2018. The prevalence of reporting effect estimates, CIs and the mention of clinical relevance increased from 2000 to 2018 by 26.6%, 34% and 32.8% respectively. Despite an increase in use in 2018, over 40% of RCTs failed to report effect estimates, CIs and clinical relevance of results.ConclusionThe prevalence of using p values remains high in physiotherapy research. Although the proportion of reporting effect estimates, CIs and clinical relevance is higher in 2018 compared to 2000, many publications still fail to report and interpret study findings in this way.</jats:sec

Routine Outcomes Monitoring to Support Improving Care for Schizophrenia: Report from the VA Mental Health QUERI

In schizophrenia, treatments that improve outcomes have not been reliably disseminated. A major barrier to improving care has been a lack of routinely collected outcomes data that identify patients who are failing to improve or not receiving effective treatments. To support high quality care, the VA Mental Health QUERI used literature review, expert interviews, and a national panel process to increase consensus regarding outcomes monitoring instruments and strategies that support quality improvement. There was very good consensus in the domains of psychotic symptoms, side-effects, drugs and alcohol, depression, caregivers, vocational functioning, and community tenure. There are validated instruments and assessment strategies that are feasible for quality improvement in routine practice

Search for a high-mass Higgs boson decaying to a W boson pair in pp collisions at √s = 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector

A search for a high-mass Higgs boson H is performed in the H → WW → ℓνℓν and H → WW → ℓνqq decay channels using pp collision data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 20.3 fb−¹ collected at √s = 8 TeV by the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. No evidence of a high-mass Higgs boson is found. Limits on σH × BR(H → WW) as a function of the Higgs boson mass mH are determined in three different scenarios: one in which the heavy Higgs boson has a narrow width compared to the experimental resolution, one for a width increasing with the boson mass and modeled by the complex-pole scheme following the same behavior as in the Standard Model, and one for intermediate widths. The upper range of the search is mH = 1500 GeV for the narrow-width scenario and mH = 1000 GeV for the other two scenarios. The lower edge of the search range is 200–300 GeV and depends on the analysis channel and search scenario. For each signal interpretation, individual and combined limits from the two WW decay channels are presented. At mH = 1500 GeV, the highest-mass point tested, σH × BR(H → WW) for a narrow-width Higgs boson is constrained to be less than 22 fb and 6.6 fb at 95% CL for the gluon fusion and vector-boson fusion production modes, respectively