Grupo de Consenso de El Cairo sobre la Integridad de la Investigación
{"title":"临床试验完整性国际共识文件","authors":"Grupo de Consenso de El Cairo sobre la Integridad de la Investigación","doi":"10.1016/j.semerg.2024.102217","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Science integrity initiatives require specific recommendations for randomised clinical trials (RCT).</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To prepare a set of statements for RCT integrity through an international multi-stakeholder consensus.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The consensus was developed via multi-country multidisciplinary stakeholder group composition and engagement; evidence synthesis of 55 systematic reviews concerning RCT integrity; anonymised two-round modified Delphi survey with consensus threshold based on the average percent of majority opinions; and, a final consensus development meeting.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>There were 30 stakeholders representing 15 countries from 5 continents including trialists, ethicists, methodologists, statisticians, consumer representative, industry representative, systematic reviewers, funding body panel members, regulatory experts, authors, journal editors, peer-reviewers and advisors for resolving integrity concerns. Delphi survey response rate was 86.7% (26/30 stakeholders). There were 111 statements (73 stakeholder-provided, 46 systematic review-generated, 8 supported by both) in the initial long list, with 8 additional statements provided during the consensus rounds. Through consensus the final set consolidated 81 statements (49 stakeholder-provided, 41 systematic review-generated, 9 supported by both). The entire RCT life cycle was covered by the set of statements including general aspects (n<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->6), design and approval (n<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->11), conduct and monitoring (n<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->19), reporting of protocols and findings (n<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->20), post-publication concerns (n<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->12), and future research and development (n<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->13).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Implementation of this multi-stakeholder consensus statement is expected to enhance RCT integrity.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Documento de consenso internacional sobre la integridad de los ensayos clínicos\",\"authors\":\"Grupo de Consenso de El Cairo sobre la Integridad de la Investigación\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.semerg.2024.102217\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Science integrity initiatives require specific recommendations for randomised clinical trials (RCT).</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To prepare a set of statements for RCT integrity through an international multi-stakeholder consensus.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The consensus was developed via multi-country multidisciplinary stakeholder group composition and engagement; evidence synthesis of 55 systematic reviews concerning RCT integrity; anonymised two-round modified Delphi survey with consensus threshold based on the average percent of majority opinions; and, a final consensus development meeting.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>There were 30 stakeholders representing 15 countries from 5 continents including trialists, ethicists, methodologists, statisticians, consumer representative, industry representative, systematic reviewers, funding body panel members, regulatory experts, authors, journal editors, peer-reviewers and advisors for resolving integrity concerns. Delphi survey response rate was 86.7% (26/30 stakeholders). There were 111 statements (73 stakeholder-provided, 46 systematic review-generated, 8 supported by both) in the initial long list, with 8 additional statements provided during the consensus rounds. Through consensus the final set consolidated 81 statements (49 stakeholder-provided, 41 systematic review-generated, 9 supported by both). The entire RCT life cycle was covered by the set of statements including general aspects (n<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->6), design and approval (n<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->11), conduct and monitoring (n<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->19), reporting of protocols and findings (n<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->20), post-publication concerns (n<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->12), and future research and development (n<!--> <!-->=<!--> <!-->13).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Implementation of this multi-stakeholder consensus statement is expected to enhance RCT integrity.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1138359324000273\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1138359324000273","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Documento de consenso internacional sobre la integridad de los ensayos clínicos
Background
Science integrity initiatives require specific recommendations for randomised clinical trials (RCT).
Objective
To prepare a set of statements for RCT integrity through an international multi-stakeholder consensus.
Methods
The consensus was developed via multi-country multidisciplinary stakeholder group composition and engagement; evidence synthesis of 55 systematic reviews concerning RCT integrity; anonymised two-round modified Delphi survey with consensus threshold based on the average percent of majority opinions; and, a final consensus development meeting.
Results
There were 30 stakeholders representing 15 countries from 5 continents including trialists, ethicists, methodologists, statisticians, consumer representative, industry representative, systematic reviewers, funding body panel members, regulatory experts, authors, journal editors, peer-reviewers and advisors for resolving integrity concerns. Delphi survey response rate was 86.7% (26/30 stakeholders). There were 111 statements (73 stakeholder-provided, 46 systematic review-generated, 8 supported by both) in the initial long list, with 8 additional statements provided during the consensus rounds. Through consensus the final set consolidated 81 statements (49 stakeholder-provided, 41 systematic review-generated, 9 supported by both). The entire RCT life cycle was covered by the set of statements including general aspects (n = 6), design and approval (n = 11), conduct and monitoring (n = 19), reporting of protocols and findings (n = 20), post-publication concerns (n = 12), and future research and development (n = 13).
Conclusion
Implementation of this multi-stakeholder consensus statement is expected to enhance RCT integrity.