30
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The under reporting of recruitment strategies in research with children with life-threatening illnesses: A systematic review

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background:

          Researchers report difficulties in conducting research with children and young people with life-limiting conditions or life-threatening illnesses and their families. Recruitment is challenged by barriers including ethical, logistical and clinical considerations.

          Aim:

          To explore how children and young people (aged 0–25 years) with life-limiting conditions or life-threatening illnesses and their families were identified, invited and consented to research published in the last 5 years.

          Design:

          Systematic review.

          Data sources:

          MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Sciences Citation Index and SCOPUS were searched for original English language research published between 2009 and 2014, recruiting children and young people with life-limiting conditions or life-threatening illness and their families.

          Results:

          A total of 215 studies – 152 qualitative, 54 quantitative and 9 mixed methods – were included. Limited recruitment information but a range of strategies and difficulties were provided. The proportion of eligible participants from those screened could not be calculated in 80% of studies. Recruitment rates could not be calculated in 77%. A total of 31% of studies recruited less than 50% of eligible participants. Reasons given for non-invitation included missing clinical or contact data, or clinician judgements of participant unsuitability. Reasons for non-participation included lack of interest and participants’ perceptions of potential burdens.

          Conclusion:

          All stages of recruitment were under reported. Transparency in reporting of participant identification, invitation and consent is needed to enable researchers to understand research implications, bias risk and to whom results apply. Research is needed to explore why consenting participants decide to take part or not and their experiences of research recruitment.

          Related collections

          Most cited references216

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies.

          Much biomedical research is observational. The reporting of such research is often inadequate, which hampers the assessment of its strengths and weaknesses and of a study's generalisability. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) initiative developed recommendations on what should be included in an accurate and complete report of an observational study. We defined the scope of the recommendations to cover three main study designs: cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies. We convened a 2-day workshop in September, 2004, with methodologists, researchers, and journal editors to draft a checklist of items. This list was subsequently revised during several meetings of the coordinating group and in e-mail discussions with the larger group of STROBE contributors, taking into account empirical evidence and methodological considerations. The workshop and the subsequent iterative process of consultation and revision resulted in a checklist of 22 items (the STROBE statement) that relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of articles.18 items are common to all three study designs and four are specific for cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional studies.A detailed explanation and elaboration document is published separately and is freely available on the websites of PLoS Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine, and Epidemiology. We hope that the STROBE statement will contribute to improving the quality of reporting of observational studies
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Treatment reduction for children and young adults with low-risk acute lymphoblastic leukaemia defined by minimal residual disease (UKALL 2003): a randomised controlled trial.

            Minimal residual disease (MRD) is the most sensitive and specific predictor of relapse risk in children with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) during remission. We assessed whether treatment intensity could be adjusted for children and young adults according to MRD risk stratification. Between Oct 1, 2003 and June 30, 2011, consecutive children and young adults (aged 1-25 years) with ALL from the UK and Ireland were recruited. Eligible patients were categorised into clinical standard, intermediate, and high risk groups on the basis of a combination of National Cancer Institute (NCI) criteria, cytogenetics, and early response to induction therapy, which was assessed by bone marrow blast counts taken at days 8 (NCI high-risk patients) and 15 (NCI standard-risk patients) after induction began. Clinical standard-risk and intermediate-risk patients were assessed for MRD. Those classified as MRD low risk (undetectable MRD at the end of induction [day 29] or detectable MRD at day 29 that became undetectable by week 11) were randomly assigned to receive one or two delayed intensification courses. Patients had received induction, consolidation, and interim maintenance therapy before they began delayed intensification. Delayed intensification consisted of pegylated asparaginase on day 4; vincristine, dexamethasone (alternate weeks), and doxorubicin for 3 weeks; and 4 weeks of cyclophosphamide and cytarabine. Computer randomisation was done with stratification by MRD result and balancing for sex, age, and white blood cell count at diagnosis by method of minimisation. Patients, clinicians, and data analysts were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was event-free survival (EFS), which was defined as time to relapse, secondary tumour, or death. Our aim was to rule out a 7% reduction in EFS in the group given one delayed intensification course relative to that given two delayed intensification courses. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN07355119. Of 3207 patients registered in the trial overall, 521 MRD low-risk patients were randomly assigned to receive one (n=260) or two (n=261) delayed intensification courses. Median follow-up of these patients was 57 months (IQR 42-72). We recorded no significant difference in EFS between the group given one delayed intensification (94·4% at 5 years, 95% CI 91·1-97·7) and that given two delayed intensifications (95·5%, 92·8-98·2; unadjusted odds ratio 1·00, 95% CI 0·43-2·31; two-sided p=0·99). The difference in 5-year EFS between the two groups was 1·1% (95% CI -5·6 to 2·5). 11 patients (actuarial relapse at 5 years 5·6%, 95% CI 2·3-8·9) given one delayed intensification and six (2·4%, 0·2-4·6) given two delayed intensifications relapsed (p=0·23). Three patients (1·2%, 0-2·6) given two delayed intensifications died of treatment-related causes compared with none in the group given one delayed intensification (p=0·08). We recorded no significant difference between groups for serious adverse events and grade 3 or 4 toxic effects; however, the second delayed intensification course was associated with one (<1%) treatment-related death, and 74 episodes of grade 3 or 4 toxic effects in 45 patients (17%). Treatment reduction is feasible for children and young adults with ALL who are predicted to have a low risk of relapse on the basis of rapid clearance of MRD by the end of induction therapy. Medical Research Council and Leukaemia and Lymphoma Research. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Temozolomide in the treatment of children with newly diagnosed diffuse intrinsic pontine gliomas: a report from the Children's Oncology Group.

              An open-label phase II study (ACNS0126) testing the efficacy of chemoradiotherapy with temozolomide (TMZ) followed by adjuvant TMZ was conducted by the Children's Oncology Group. During the period from July 6, 2004 through September 6, 2005, 63 children with newly diagnosed diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma (DIPG) were enrolled in the study. All patients received TMZ at a dosage of 90 mg/m(2)/day for 42 days to a dose of 59.4 Gy. Four weeks following irradiation, TMZ was given at a dosage of 200 mg/m(2)/day for 5 days every 28 days, for a total of 10 cycles. The primary objective of the statistical analysis was to determine whether the current treatment produced a 1-year event-free survival (EFS) rate higher than the historical baseline of 21.9% observed in CCG-9941. The mean 1-year EFS (± standard deviation) was 14% ± 4.5%, compared with 21.9% ± 5% for CCG-9941. The P value of the test of comparison of 1-year EFS, based on a 1-sided, 1-sample test of proportions, was .96. There was no evidence that temozolomide produced a 1-year EFS rate higher than 21.9%. The mean 1-year OS (± standard deviation) was 40% ± 6.5%, compared with 32% ± 6% for CCG-9941. The median time to death was 9.6 months. Chemoradiotherapy with TMZ followed by adjuvant TMZ is not more effective than previously reported regimens for the treatment of children with DIPG.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Palliat Med
                Palliat Med
                PMJ
                sppmj
                Palliative Medicine
                SAGE Publications (Sage UK: London, England )
                0269-2163
                1477-030X
                08 September 2016
                May 2017
                : 31
                : 5
                : 419-436
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Louis Dundas Centre for Children’s Palliative Care, UCL Institute of Child Health, London, UK
                [2 ]Marie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, UCL Division of Psychiatry, London, UK
                [3 ]Population, Policy and Practice Programme, UCL Institute of Child Health, London, UK
                Author notes
                [*]Briony F Hudson, Marie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, UCL Division of Psychiatry, 6th Floor, Maple House, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 7NF, UK. Email: b.hudson@ 123456ucl.ac.uk
                Article
                10.1177_0269216316663856
                10.1177/0269216316663856
                5405809
                27609607
                647a924d-8a3e-4900-bb43-8d2571400017
                © The Author(s) 2016

                This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 License ( http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page ( https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).

                History
                Categories
                Review Articles

                Anesthesiology & Pain management
                child,palliative care,research design,research report,patient selection,review

                Comments

                Comment on this article