Development of a core outcome set for the evaluation of interventions to enhance trial participation decisions on behalf of adults who lack capacity to consent: a mixed methods study (COnSiDER Study)

Trials

M. Robling¹  E. Randell¹  V. Shepherd¹  K. Hood²  F. Wood³ 

[1] Centre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK;Centre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK;PRIME Centre Wales, Cardiff, UK;Division of Population Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK;PRIME Centre Wales, Cardiff, UK;

关键词: Informed consent;    Proxy;    Core outcome set;    Consensus methods;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s13063-021-05883-5

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundTrials involving adults who lack capacity to provide consent rely on proxy or surrogate decision-makers, usually a family member, to make decisions about participation. Interventions to enhance proxy decisions about trial participation are now being developed. However, a lack of standardised outcome measures limits evaluation of these interventions. The aim of this study was to establish an agreed standardised core outcome set (COS) for use when evaluating interventions to improve proxy decisions about trial participation.MethodsWe used established methods to develop the COS including a consensus study with key stakeholder groups comprising those who will use the COS in research (researchers and healthcare professionals) and patients or their representatives. Following a scoping review to identify candidate items, we used a modified two-round Delphi survey to achieve consensus on core outcomes, with equivocal items taken to a consensus meeting for discussion. The COS was finalised following an online consensus meeting in October 2020.ResultsA total of 28 UK stakeholders (5 researchers, 10 trialists, 3 patient/family representatives, 7 recruiters and 3 advisors/approvers) participated in the online Delphi survey to rank candidate items from the scoping review (n = 36) and additional items proposed by participants (n = 1). Items were broadly grouped into three categories: how family members make decisions, their experiences of making decisions, and the personal aspects that influence the decision. Following the Delphi survey, 27 items were included and ten items exhibited no consensus which required discussion at the consensus meeting. Sixteen participants attended the meeting, including additional patient/family representatives invited to increase representation from this key group (n = 2). We reached consensus for the inclusion of 28 outcome items, including one selected at the consensus meeting.ConclusionsThe study identified outcomes that should be measured as a minimum in all evaluations of interventions to enhance proxy decisions about trials. These relate to the process of decision-making, proxies’ experience of decision-making, and factors that influence decision-making such as understanding. Further work with people with impairing conditions and their families is needed to explore their views about the COS and to identify appropriate outcome measures and timing of measurement.Trial registrationThe study is registered on the COMET database (https://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/1409)

【 授权许可】

CC BY