posted on 2019-10-17, 14:28authored byHML Young, S Goodliffe, M Madhani, K Phelps, E Regen, A Locke, JO Burton, SJ Singh, AC Smith, S Conroy
There is a lack of guidance for developing progression criteria (PC) within feasibility studies. We describe a process for co-producing PC for an ongoing feasibility study. Patient contributors, clinicians and researchers participated in discussions facilitated using the modified Nominal Group Technique (NGT). Stage one involved individual discussion groups used to develop and rank PC for aspects of the trial key to feasibility. A second stage involving representatives from each of the individual groups then discussed and ranked these PC. The highest ranking PC became the criteria used. At each stage all members were provided with a brief education session to aid understanding and decision-making. Fifty members (15 (29%) patients, 13 (25%) researchers and 24 (46%) clinicians) were involved in eight initial groups, and eight (two (25%) patients, five (62%) clinicians, one (13%) researcher) in one final group. PC relating to eligibility, recruitment, intervention and outcome acceptability and loss to follow-up were co-produced. Groups highlighted numerous means of adapting intervention and trial procedures should 'change' criteria be met. Modified NGT enabled the equal inclusion of patients, clinician and researcher in the co-production of PC. The structure and processes provided a transparent mechanism for setting PC that could be replicated in other feasibility studies.
Funding
The work was supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), Leicester Biomedical
Research Centre, Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care East Midlands (CLAHRC
EM) and the Stoneygate Trust. H.M.L.Y. and J.O.B. are supported by grants from the NIHR (DRF-2016-09-015 and
CS-2013-13-014). S.J.S. is supported by the Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care
East Midlands. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the
NHS, the National Institute for Health Research or the Department of Health.
History
Citation
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2019, 16(19), 3756
Author affiliation
/Organisation/COLLEGE OF LIFE SCIENCES/School of Medicine/Department of Infection, Immunity and Inflammation
Version
VoR (Version of Record)
Published in
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
The following are available online at http://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/19/3756/s1.
Table S1: Template for co-producing progression criteria for exploratory studies: generation of progression criteria,
Table S2: Template for co-producing progression criteria for exploratory studies: voting form.