Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35550599›Full record

ArticleTrials2022

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

Louisa Lawrie, Eilidh M Duncan, Jan O Jansen, Marion K Campbell, Evelyn Brunsdon, Zoë Skea, Taylor Coffey, Claire Cochran, Katie Gillies

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Louisa LawrieInstitute of Applied Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition, Health Services Research Unit, 3Rd Floor Health Sciences Building, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK. louisa.lawrie1@abdn.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-9867-2184
Eilidh M DuncanInstitute of Applied Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition, Health Services Research Unit, 3Rd Floor Health Sciences Building, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK.
Jan O JansenInstitute of Applied Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition, Health Services Research Unit, 3Rd Floor Health Sciences Building, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK.
Marion K CampbellInstitute of Applied Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition, Health Services Research Unit, 3Rd Floor Health Sciences Building, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK.
Evelyn BrunsdonInstitute of Applied Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition, Health Services Research Unit, 3Rd Floor Health Sciences Building, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK.
Zoë SkeaInstitute of Applied Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition, Health Services Research Unit, 3Rd Floor Health Sciences Building, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK.
Taylor CoffeyInstitute of Applied Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition, Health Services Research Unit, 3Rd Floor Health Sciences Building, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK.
Claire CochranInstitute of Applied Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition, Health Services Research Unit, 3Rd Floor Health Sciences Building, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK.
Katie GilliesInstitute of Applied Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition, Health Services Research Unit, 3Rd Floor Health Sciences Building, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK.
University of Aberdeen · GB

Funding

Chief Scientist Office HSRU1National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) board 14/199/09
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical trials comprise multiple processes at various stages of the trial lifecycle. These processes often involve complex behaviours such as recruiting vulnerable patient populations and clinicians having to deliver complex trial interventions successfully. Few studies have utilised a behavioural framework to assess challenges and develop strategies for effective trial recruitment and delivery of trial interventions. This study reports the application of an innovative methodological approach to understand core trial processes, namely recruitment and intervention delivery, using a behavioural science approach to develop strategies designed to mitigate trial process problems.

methodsThe UK-REBOA trial aims to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (a novel intervention) in injured patients with exsanguinating haemorrhage. A behavioural investigation ('diagnosis') was conducted using theory-informed (Theoretical Domains Framework, TDF) semi-structured interviews with site staff from the UK-REBOA trial to examine trial processes which could be improved in relation to trial recruitment and delivery of the intervention. Interviews were analysed using the TDF to identify influences on behaviour, which were then mapped to techniques for behaviour change and developed into potential solutions.

resultsThe behavioural diagnosis of the challenges experienced during trial processes highlighted factors relevant to a range of TDF domains: Skills, Environmental context and resources, Beliefs about capabilities, Beliefs about consequences, Social influences, and Memory, attention, and decision-making processes. Within the solution development phase, we identified 24 suitable behaviour change techniques that were developed into proposed solutions to target reported process problems with the aim of changing behaviour to improve recruitment and/or intervention delivery. Proposed solutions included targeted changes to trial training content, suggestions to restructure the environment (e.g. reinforced the purpose of the trial with information about the social and environmental consequences) and other strategies to reduce barriers to recruitment and intervention delivery.

conclusionsThis study demonstrates the feasibility of applying a behavioural approach to investigate ('diagnose') behavioural trial process problems and subsequently develop and implement targeted solutions ('treatment') in an active trauma trial. Understanding the factors that affected behaviour, attitudes and beliefs in this trauma trial allowed us to implement theoretically informed, evidence-based solutions designed to enhance trial practices.

trial registrationISRCTN 16,184,981.

Indexed as

Behavior TherapyClinical Trials as TopicHumansUnited KingdomBehavioural scienceComplex interventionsProcess evaluationsTheoretical domains frameworkTrial methodology

Identifiers

PMID35550599
PMCPMC9097042
OpenAlexW4280530445

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.