FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1560134422> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1560134422 abstract "Background Analysis of drug safety in clinical trials involves assessing adverse events (AEs) individually or by aggregate statistical synthesis to provide evidence of likely adverse drug reactions (ADR). While some AEs may be ascertained from physical examinations or tests, there is great reliance on reports from participants to detect subjective symptoms, where he/she is often the only source of information. There is no consensus on how these reports should be elicited, although it is known that questioning methods influence the extent and nature of data detected. This leaves room for measurement error and undermines comparisons between studies and pooled analyses. This review investigated comparisons of methods used in trials to elicit participant‐reported AEs. This should contribute to knowledge about the methodological challenges and possible solutions for achieving better, or more consistent, AE ascertainment in trials. Objectives To systematically review the research that has compared methods used within clinical drug trials (or methods that would be specific for such trials) to elicit information about AEs defined in the protocol or in the planning for the trial. Search methods Databases (searched to March 2015 unless indicated otherwise) included: Embase; MEDLINE; MEDLINE in Process and Other Non‐Indexed Citations; Cochrane Methodology Register (July 2012); Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (February 2015); Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (January 2015); Health Technology Assessment database (January 2015); CINAHL; CAB Abstracts; BIOSIS (July 2013); Science Citation Index; Social Science Citation Index; Conference Proceedings Citation Index – Science. The search used thesaurus headings and synonyms for the following concepts: (A): Adverse events AND measurement; (B): Participants AND elicitation (also other synonyms for extraction of information about adverse effects from people); (C): Participants AND checklists (also other synonyms as for B). Pragmatic ways were used to limit the results whilst trying to maintain sensitivity. There were no date or sample size restrictions but only reports published in English were included fully, because of resource constraints as regards translation. Selection criteria Two types of studies were included: drug trials comparing two or more methods within‐ or between‐participants to elicit participant‐reported AEs, and research studies performed outside the context of a trial to compare methods which could be used in trials (evidenced by reference to such applicability). Primary outcome data included AEs elicited from participants taking part in any such clinical trial. We included any participant‐reported data relevant for an assessment of drug‐related harm, using the original authors' terminology (and definition, where available), with comment on whether the data were likely to be treatment‐emergent AEs or not. Data collection and analysis Titles and abstracts were independently reviewed for eligibility. Full texts of potentially eligible citations were independently reviewed for final eligibility. Relevant data were extracted and subjected to a 100% check. Disagreements were resolved by discussion, involving a third author. The risk of bias was independently assessed by two authors. The Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool was used for reports comparing outcomes between participants, while for within‐participant comparisons, each study was critically evaluated in terms of potential impact of the design and conduct on findings using the framework of selection, performance, detection, attrition, reporting, and other biases. An attempt was made to contact authors to retrieve protocols or specific relevant missing information. Reports were not excluded on the basis of quality unless data for outcomes were impossible to compare (e.g. where denominators differed). A narrative synthesis was conducted because differences in study design and presentation meant that a quantitative meta‐analysis was not possible. Main results The 33 eligible studies largely compared open questions with checklist‐type questions or rating scales. Two included participant interviews. Despite different designs, populations and details of questioning methods, the narrative review showed that more specific questioning of participants led to more AEs detected compared to a more general enquiry. A subset of six studies suggested that more severe, bothersome, or otherwise clinically relevant AEs were reported when an initial open enquiry was used, while some less severe, bothersome, or clinically relevant AEs were only reported with a subsequent specific enquiry. However, two studies showed that quite severe or debilitating AEs were only detected by an interview, while other studies did not find a difference in the nature of AEs between elicitation methods. No conclusions could be made regarding the impact of question method on the ability to detect a statistically significant difference between study groups. There was no common statistical rubric, but we were able to represent some effect measures as a risk ratio of the proportion of participants with at least one AE. This showed a lower level of reporting for open questions (O) compared to checklists (CL), with a range for the risk ratios of 0.12 to 0.64. Authors' conclusions This review supports concerns that methods to elicit participant‐reported AEs influence the detection of these data. There was a risk for under‐detection of AEs in studies using a more general elicitation method compared to those using a comprehensive method. These AEs may be important from a clinical perspective or for patients. This under‐detection could compromise ability to pool AE data. However, the impact on the nature of the AE detected by different methods is unclear. The wide variety and low quality of methods to compare elicitation strategies limited this review. Future studies would be improved by using and reporting clear definitions and terminology for AEs (and other important variables), frequency and time period over which they were ascertained, how they were graded, assessed for a relationship to the study drug, coded, and tabulated/reported. While the many potential AE endpoints in a trial may preclude the development of general AE patient‐reported outcome measurement instruments, much could also be learnt from how these employ both quantitative and qualitative methods to better understand data elicited. Any chosen questioning method needs to be feasible for use by both staff and participants." @default.
• W1560134422 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1560134422 creator A5003172773 @default.
• W1560134422 creator A5023047768 @default.
• W1560134422 creator A5046922016 @default.
• W1560134422 creator A5056776331 @default.
• W1560134422 creator A5088730411 @default.
• W1560134422 date "2018-01-16" @default.
• W1560134422 modified "2023-10-01" @default.
• W1560134422 title "Eliciting adverse effects data from participants in clinical trials" @default.
• W1560134422 cites W1527736542 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W1560134422 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W1560286038 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W1592653824 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W1618446379 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W1798263776 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W182972843 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W1967887741 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W1968324493 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W1968822573 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W1972965892 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W1976379659 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W1979021544 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W1983271543 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W1983977010 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W1986360186 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W1986426837 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W1987462925 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W1989467621 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W1993668511 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W1994490940 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W1994885411 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W1995622348 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W1999475508 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2000881374 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2003310006 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2004252407 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2011261380 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2016146859 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2018479094 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2020924652 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2022220536 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2024122126 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2024596918 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2025071087 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2032536420 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2032571541 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2033048080 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2036740 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2041643837 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2045904048 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2061165441 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2061221244 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2061475240 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2062009480 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2065451171 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2067793528 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2068073690 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2068296837 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2069038731 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2073679198 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2077104280 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2077754178 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2080511868 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2083324971 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2087692361 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2093966280 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2094574837 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2100644328 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2101372256 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2102908828 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2113464761 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2124714257 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2126930838 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2127144876 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2129009487 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2131945564 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2135079569 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2137554140 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2138199781 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2138772646 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2139890332 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2142225926 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2143229811 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2150666797 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2154384178 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2157875025 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2160729753 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2165153229 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2211529637 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2404625794 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2411991847 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2414756394 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2414792027 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2414896229 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2415981855 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2416753532 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2444180709 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W2503627409 @default.
• W1560134422 cites W4235300522 @default.

• next