4.4 Article

Cluster randomized trials utilizing primary care electronic health records: methodological issues in design, conduct, and analysis (eCRT Study)

期刊

TRIALS
卷 15, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-220

关键词

Clinical trial; Cluster randomization; Electronic health records; Primary care; Implementation science; Decision support

资金

  1. Joint Initiative in Electronic Patient Records and Databases in Research
  2. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at Guy's
  3. MHRA
  4. Wellcome Trust
  5. Medical Research Council
  6. NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme
  7. Innovative Medicine Initiative
  8. UK Department of Health
  9. Technology Strategy Board
  10. Seventh Framework Programme EU
  11. St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust
  12. King's College London
  13. Medical Research Council [MR/K006665/1, MC_PC_13042] Funding Source: researchfish
  14. MRC [MR/K006665/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: There is growing interest in conducting clinical and cluster randomized trials through electronic health records. This paper reports on the methodological issues identified during the implementation of two cluster randomized trials using the electronic health records of the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). Methods: Two trials were completed in primary care: one aimed to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory infection; the other aimed to increase physician adherence with secondary prevention interventions after first stroke. The paper draws on documentary records and trial datasets to report on the methodological experience with respect to research ethics and research governance approval, general practice recruitment and allocation, sample size calculation and power, intervention implementation, and trial analysis. Results: We obtained research governance approvals from more than 150 primary care organizations in England, Wales, and Scotland. There were 104 CPRD general practices recruited to the antibiotic trial and 106 to the stroke trial, with the target number of practices being recruited within six months. Interventions were installed into practice information systems remotely over the internet. The mean number of participants per practice was 5,588 in the antibiotic trial and 110 in the stroke trial, with the coefficient of variation of practice sizes being 0.53 and 0.56 respectively. Outcome measures showed substantial correlations between the 12 months before, and after intervention, with coefficients ranging from 0.42 for diastolic blood pressure to 0.91 for proportion of consultations with antibiotics prescribed, defining practice and participant eligibility for analysis requires careful consideration. Conclusions: Cluster randomized trials may be performed efficiently in large samples from UK general practices using the electronic health records of a primary care database. The geographical dispersal of trial sites presents a difficulty for research governance approval and intervention implementation. Pretrial data analyses should inform trial design and analysis plans.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据