开发 "为每个家庭提供更好的研究互动"(BRIEF)干预措施,以支持新生儿临床试验的招募工作:干预措施绘图指导方法

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Trials Pub Date : 2024-09-12 DOI:10.1186/s13063-024-08446-6
Elliott Mark Weiss, Megan M. Gray, Linda K. Ko, Devan M. Duenas, Ellie Oslin, Stephanie A. Kraft
{"title":"开发 \"为每个家庭提供更好的研究互动\"(BRIEF)干预措施,以支持新生儿临床试验的招募工作:干预措施绘图指导方法","authors":"Elliott Mark Weiss, Megan M. Gray, Linda K. Ko, Devan M. Duenas, Ellie Oslin, Stephanie A. Kraft","doi":"10.1186/s13063-024-08446-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recruitment for neonatal clinical trials can be particularly challenging. Low enrollment rates bias the research population and decrease generalizability of findings. We identified a critical need for an intervention to improve how researchers recruit for neonatal clinical trials. Working within the US neonatal research context, we developed the Better Research Interactions for Every Family (BRIEF) Intervention, which had two overarching goals: to improve the recruitment experience for all parents, focusing on minoritized populations, and to increase participation, focusing on decreasing disparities in research participation. We used intervention mapping (IM) to guide all steps of intervention development. IM is a planning framework that provides a systematic process and detailed protocol for step-by-step decision-making for intervention development, implementation, and evaluation. We performed IM’s six steps. In step 1, we convened two stakeholder groups, a parent panel and an expert panel, who provided guidance through development of all BRIEF components. Through a recent systematic review, empirical data collected by our team, and consultations with the panels, we identified key determinants (barriers and facilitators) of low enrollment rates and research team members as change agents. In step 2, we iteratively refined our list of key factors to include and linked determinants of behavior changes to these performance objectives. In step 3, we chose three theories (social cognitive theory, theory of information processing, and the trans-theoretical model), methods from identified practical applications suitable for the population (research team members) and the context (busy research NICU teams). In step 4, we developed and refined the intervention components, including self-guided pre-work and a single in-person session. In step 5, we identified the Darbepoetin plus slow-release intravenous iron trial as our partner study in which to pilot BRIEF. In step 6, we developed a multi-stage evaluation plan that included five distinct levels of outcomes. This manuscript shares our rationale and processes for the creation of a research team member-facing intervention aiming to improve recruitment processes for neonatal clinical trials. Our approach can inform those aiming to improve recruitment for neonatal clinical trials and those who may be considering use of IM within similar contexts.","PeriodicalId":23333,"journal":{"name":"Trials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development of the Better Research Interactions for Every Family (BRIEF) intervention to support recruitment for neonatal clinical trials: an intervention mapping guided approach\",\"authors\":\"Elliott Mark Weiss, Megan M. Gray, Linda K. Ko, Devan M. Duenas, Ellie Oslin, Stephanie A. Kraft\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13063-024-08446-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Recruitment for neonatal clinical trials can be particularly challenging. Low enrollment rates bias the research population and decrease generalizability of findings. We identified a critical need for an intervention to improve how researchers recruit for neonatal clinical trials. Working within the US neonatal research context, we developed the Better Research Interactions for Every Family (BRIEF) Intervention, which had two overarching goals: to improve the recruitment experience for all parents, focusing on minoritized populations, and to increase participation, focusing on decreasing disparities in research participation. We used intervention mapping (IM) to guide all steps of intervention development. IM is a planning framework that provides a systematic process and detailed protocol for step-by-step decision-making for intervention development, implementation, and evaluation. We performed IM’s six steps. In step 1, we convened two stakeholder groups, a parent panel and an expert panel, who provided guidance through development of all BRIEF components. Through a recent systematic review, empirical data collected by our team, and consultations with the panels, we identified key determinants (barriers and facilitators) of low enrollment rates and research team members as change agents. In step 2, we iteratively refined our list of key factors to include and linked determinants of behavior changes to these performance objectives. In step 3, we chose three theories (social cognitive theory, theory of information processing, and the trans-theoretical model), methods from identified practical applications suitable for the population (research team members) and the context (busy research NICU teams). In step 4, we developed and refined the intervention components, including self-guided pre-work and a single in-person session. In step 5, we identified the Darbepoetin plus slow-release intravenous iron trial as our partner study in which to pilot BRIEF. In step 6, we developed a multi-stage evaluation plan that included five distinct levels of outcomes. This manuscript shares our rationale and processes for the creation of a research team member-facing intervention aiming to improve recruitment processes for neonatal clinical trials. Our approach can inform those aiming to improve recruitment for neonatal clinical trials and those who may be considering use of IM within similar contexts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":23333,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Trials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Trials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-024-08446-6\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-024-08446-6","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

新生儿临床试验的招募工作尤其具有挑战性。低招募率会使研究对象产生偏差,并降低研究结果的可推广性。我们发现,研究人员亟需采取干预措施来改善新生儿临床试验的招募方式。在美国新生儿研究的背景下,我们制定了 "为每个家庭提供更好的研究互动"(BRIEF)干预措施,该措施有两个总体目标:改善所有家长的招募体验,重点关注少数群体;提高参与率,重点减少研究参与中的差异。我们使用干预绘图(IM)来指导干预发展的所有步骤。IM 是一个规划框架,它为干预措施的开发、实施和评估提供了一个系统的流程和详细的决策程序。我们执行了 IM 的六个步骤。在第一步,我们召集了两个利益相关者小组,即家长小组和专家小组,他们为 BRIEF 所有组成部分的开发提供了指导。通过近期的系统回顾、我们团队收集的经验数据以及与专家小组的协商,我们确定了入学率低的关键决定因素(障碍和促进因素),并确定了作为变革推动者的研究团队成员。在第二步中,我们反复修改了关键因素清单,并将行为改变的决定因素与这些绩效目标联系起来。第 3 步,我们选择了三种理论(社会认知理论、信息处理理论和跨理论模型),并从已确定的实际应用中选择了适合人群(研究团队成员)和环境(繁忙的研究新生儿重症监护室团队)的方法。在第 4 步中,我们开发并完善了干预内容,包括自我指导的前期工作和一次面谈。第 5 步,我们确定了达贝泊汀加缓释静脉注射铁试验作为我们的合作研究,并在其中试行 BRIEF。在第 6 步,我们制定了一个多阶段评估计划,其中包括五个不同层次的结果。本手稿分享了我们创建面向研究团队成员的干预措施的原理和过程,旨在改善新生儿临床试验的招募流程。我们的方法可以为那些旨在改善新生儿临床试验招募工作的人以及那些可能考虑在类似情况下使用 IM 的人提供参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Development of the Better Research Interactions for Every Family (BRIEF) intervention to support recruitment for neonatal clinical trials: an intervention mapping guided approach
Recruitment for neonatal clinical trials can be particularly challenging. Low enrollment rates bias the research population and decrease generalizability of findings. We identified a critical need for an intervention to improve how researchers recruit for neonatal clinical trials. Working within the US neonatal research context, we developed the Better Research Interactions for Every Family (BRIEF) Intervention, which had two overarching goals: to improve the recruitment experience for all parents, focusing on minoritized populations, and to increase participation, focusing on decreasing disparities in research participation. We used intervention mapping (IM) to guide all steps of intervention development. IM is a planning framework that provides a systematic process and detailed protocol for step-by-step decision-making for intervention development, implementation, and evaluation. We performed IM’s six steps. In step 1, we convened two stakeholder groups, a parent panel and an expert panel, who provided guidance through development of all BRIEF components. Through a recent systematic review, empirical data collected by our team, and consultations with the panels, we identified key determinants (barriers and facilitators) of low enrollment rates and research team members as change agents. In step 2, we iteratively refined our list of key factors to include and linked determinants of behavior changes to these performance objectives. In step 3, we chose three theories (social cognitive theory, theory of information processing, and the trans-theoretical model), methods from identified practical applications suitable for the population (research team members) and the context (busy research NICU teams). In step 4, we developed and refined the intervention components, including self-guided pre-work and a single in-person session. In step 5, we identified the Darbepoetin plus slow-release intravenous iron trial as our partner study in which to pilot BRIEF. In step 6, we developed a multi-stage evaluation plan that included five distinct levels of outcomes. This manuscript shares our rationale and processes for the creation of a research team member-facing intervention aiming to improve recruitment processes for neonatal clinical trials. Our approach can inform those aiming to improve recruitment for neonatal clinical trials and those who may be considering use of IM within similar contexts.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Trials
Trials 医学-医学:研究与实验
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
4.00%
发文量
966
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Trials is an open access, peer-reviewed, online journal that will encompass all aspects of the performance and findings of randomized controlled trials. Trials will experiment with, and then refine, innovative approaches to improving communication about trials. We are keen to move beyond publishing traditional trial results articles (although these will be included). We believe this represents an exciting opportunity to advance the science and reporting of trials. Prior to 2006, Trials was published as Current Controlled Trials in Cardiovascular Medicine (CCTCVM). All published CCTCVM articles are available via the Trials website and citations to CCTCVM article URLs will continue to be supported.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信