| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Fitzsimmons-Craft, Ellen E., et al.
(författare)
-
Harnessing mobile technology to reduce mental health disorders in college populations : A randomized controlled trial study protocol
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Contemporary Clinical Trials. - : ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC. - 1551-7144 .- 1559-2030. ; 103
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- About a third of college students struggle with anxiety, depression, or an eating disorder, and only 20?40% of college students with mental disorders receive treatment. Inadequacies in mental health care delivery result in prolonged illness, disease progression, poorer prognosis, and greater likelihood of relapse, highlighting the need for a new approach to detect mental health problems and engage college students in services. We have developed a transdiagnostic, low-cost mobile mental health targeted prevention and intervention platform that uses population-level screening to engage college students in tailored services that address common mental health problems. We will test the impact of this mobile mental health platform for service delivery in a large-scale trial across 20+ colleges. Students who screen positive or at high-risk for clinical anxiety, depression, or an eating disorder and who are not currently engaged in mental health services (N = 7884) will be randomly assigned to: 1) intervention via the mobile mental health platform; or 2) referral to usual care (i.e., campus health or counseling center). We will test whether the mobile mental health platform, compared to referral, is associated with improved uptake, reduced clinical cases, disorder-specific symptoms, and improved quality of life and functioning. We will also test mediators, predictors, and moderators of improved mental health outcomes, as well as stakeholder-relevant outcomes, including cost-effectiveness and academic performance. This population-level approach to service engagement has the potential to improve mental health outcomes for the millions of students enrolled in U.S. colleges and universities.
|
|
| 6. |
- Hansson, Mats G, et al.
(författare)
-
Ulysses contracts for the doctor and for the patient
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Contemporary Clinical Trials. - : Elsevier BV. - 1559-2030 .- 1551-7144. ; 31:3, s. 202-206
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Research subjects participating in randomised clinical trials have a right to drop out of a study without specifying any reason for this. However, leaving a trial may be contradictory to their own general interests in medical research since drop outs may lead to biased conclusions and loss of valuable medical information. We suggest in this paper that self-binding "Ulysses contracts" that are non-exploitative and based on autonomous decisions by research subjects as well as by investigating doctors should be implemented with stopping rules adjusted to the needs of different kinds of randomised clinical trials.
|
|
| 7. |
- Hardy, Timothy, et al.
(författare)
-
The European NAFLD Registry : A real-world longitudinal cohort study of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Contemporary Clinical Trials. - : Elsevier. - 1551-7144 .- 1559-2030. ; 98
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (NAFLD), a progressive liver disease that is closely associated with obesity, type 2 diabetes, hypertension and dyslipidaemia, represents an increasing global public health challenge. There is significant variability in the disease course: the majority exhibit only fat accumulation in the liver but a significant minority develop a necroinflammatory form of the disease (non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, NASH) that may progress to cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. At present our understanding of pathogenesis, disease natural history and long-term outcomes remain incomplete. There is a need for large, well characterised patient cohorts that may be used to address these knowledge gaps and to support the development of better biomarkers and novel therapies. The European NAFLD Registry is an international, prospectively recruited observational cohort study that aims to establish a large, highly-phenotyped patient cohort and linked bioresource. Here we describe the infrastructure, data management and monitoring plans, and the standard operating procedures implemented to ensure the timely and systematic collection of high-quality data and samples. Already recruiting subjects at secondary/tertiary care centres across Europe, the Registry is supporting the European Union IMI2-funded LITMUS Liver Investigation: Testing Marker Utility in Steatohepatitis consortium, which is a major international effort to robustly validate biomarkers that diagnose, risk stratify and/or monitor NAFLD progression and liver fibrosis stage. The European NAFLD Registry has the demonstrable capacity to support research and biomarker development at scale and pace.
|
|
| 8. |
- Hedberg, Suzanne, et al.
(författare)
-
BEST: Bypass equipoise sleeve trial; rationale and design of a randomized, registry-based, multicenter trial comparing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass with sleeve gastrectomy
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Contemporary Clinical Trials. - : Elsevier BV. - 1551-7144 .- 1559-2030. ; 84
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Laparoscopic gastric bypass (LGBP) is a well-documented surgical intervention for severe obesity. Recently, laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has gained increased popularity. Short-term follow-up in limited-sized randomized trials comparing LGBP and LSG show no major differences in weight-loss, adverse events, or effect on comorbidities; however, there is a lack of sufficiently powered, pragmatic, randomized controlled trials comparing the mid- and long-term results of the two methods. Method: BEST is a randomized, registry-based, multicenter trial comparing LGBP and LSG. The trial has two primary outcomes; rates of substantial complications (SC) and total body weight loss. We hypothesize that patients treated with LSG will experience 35% fewer substantial complications during the 5-year follow-up compared to patients treated with LGBP, and that the efficacy of LSG will remain within a non-inferiority margin of 5% in terms of weight loss. Our sample size calculation, using data from the Scandinavian Obesity Surgery Registry (SOReg), shows a power of 80% for SC and > 95% for weight loss at p < .025 with a total of 2100 included patients. The design of the trial will also enable comparisons within several relevant patient subgroups. Conclusions: As a large-sized, pragmatic, randomized trial, BEST will provide robust data comparing LGBP with LSG by generating long-term results on weight loss and SC's, as well as secondary outcomes and comparisons within patient subgroups. The use of a well-established registry for registration of all data facilitates a large multicenter trial, and combines the strengths of registry studies with those of a randomized trial. Clinical Trials registry: NCT 02767505. © 2019 Elsevier Inc.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Jonsson, Ulf, 1974-, et al.
(författare)
-
Reporting of harms in randomized controlled trials of psychological interventions for mental and behavioral disorders : A review of current practice
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Contemporary Clinical Trials. - : Elsevier BV. - 1551-7144 .- 1559-2030. ; 38:1, s. 1-8
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- BackgroundData suggest that certain psychological interventions can induce harm in a significant number of patients. While the need for adequate reporting of harms in clinical trials has repeatedly been emphasized, it is uncertain whether such information routinely is collected and reported in trials within this research field.MethodWe used the two major databases in clinical psychology and medicine (PsycINFO and PubMed) to identify original publications from 2010 reporting randomized controlled trials of psychological interventions for patients with mental and behavioral disorders. Two reviewers searched the full-text reports for information about monitoring of adverse events, side effects, and deterioration.ResultsTotally 132 eligible trials were identified. Only 28 trials (21%) included information that indicated any monitoring of harms on patient level. Four (3%) of these trials provided a description of adverse events as well as the methods used for collecting these data. Five of the trials (4%) reported adverse events but gave incomplete information about the method. An additional four reports (3%) briefly stated that no adverse events occurred, whereas 15 trials (11%) only provided information on deterioration or indicated monitoring of deterioration. The probability of including harm-related information was related to the journal impact factor.ConclusionImportant information about harms is not reported systematically within this research field, suggesting that the risk of reporting bias is nontrivial in conclusions about the risk-benefit ratio of psychological treatments. Guidelines on how to define, detect, and report harms related to psychological interventions could facilitate better reporting.
|
|
