Beyond the Randomized Controlled Trial: A Review of Alternatives in mHealth Clinical Trial Methods
نویسندگان
چکیده
BACKGROUND Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have long been considered the primary research study design capable of eliciting causal relationships between health interventions and consequent outcomes. However, with a prolonged duration from recruitment to publication, high-cost trial implementation, and a rigid trial protocol, RCTs are perceived as an impractical evaluation methodology for most mHealth apps. OBJECTIVE Given the recent development of alternative evaluation methodologies and tools to automate mHealth research, we sought to determine the breadth of these methods and the extent that they were being used in clinical trials. METHODS We conducted a review of the ClinicalTrials.gov registry to identify and examine current clinical trials involving mHealth apps and retrieved relevant trials registered between November 2014 and November 2015. RESULTS Of the 137 trials identified, 71 were found to meet inclusion criteria. The majority used a randomized controlled trial design (80%, 57/71). Study designs included 36 two-group pretest-posttest control group comparisons (51%, 36/71), 16 posttest-only control group comparisons (23%, 16/71), 7 one-group pretest-posttest designs (10%, 7/71), 2 one-shot case study designs (3%, 2/71), and 2 static-group comparisons (3%, 2/71). A total of 17 trials included a qualitative component to their methodology (24%, 17/71). Complete trial data collection required 20 months on average to complete (mean 21, SD 12). For trials with a total duration of 2 years or more (31%, 22/71), the average time from recruitment to complete data collection (mean 35 months, SD 10) was 2 years longer than the average time required to collect primary data (mean 11, SD 8). Trials had a moderate sample size of 112 participants. Two trials were conducted online (3%, 2/71) and 7 trials collected data continuously (10%, 7/68). Onsite study implementation was heavily favored (97%, 69/71). Trials with four data collection points had a longer study duration than trials with two data collection points: F4,56=3.2, P=.021, η(2)=0.18. Single-blinded trials had a longer data collection period compared to open trials: F2,58=3.8, P=.028, η(2)=0.12. Academic sponsorship was the most common form of trial funding (73%, 52/71). Trials with academic sponsorship had a longer study duration compared to industry sponsorship: F2,61=3.7, P=.030, η(2)=0.11. Combined, data collection frequency, study masking, sample size, and study sponsorship accounted for 32.6% of the variance in study duration: F4,55=6.6, P<.01, adjusted r(2)=.33. Only 7 trials had been completed at the time this retrospective review was conducted (10%, 7/71). CONCLUSIONS mHealth evaluation methodology has not deviated from common methods, despite the need for more relevant and timely evaluations. There is a need for clinical evaluation to keep pace with the level of innovation of mHealth if it is to have meaningful impact in informing payers, providers, policy makers, and patients.
منابع مشابه
Evaluation of the Quality of Writing of the Title and Abstract of Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Papers Published in the Journals of the Iran,s Universities of Medical Sciences in 2016, Based on the CONSORT Checklist: A Descriptive Study
Background and Objectives: Given the fact that randomized controlled clinical trials are more valid than other research methods to determine the therapeutic effects of treatment, proper design and accurate reporting is of particular importance. This study was conducted with the aim of evaluating the quality of writing the title and abstract of randomized clinical trials of Iranian medical unive...
متن کاملThe efficacy of oral Erythromycin in the treatment of patients with Pityriasis Rosea: A randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial
Background: Pityriasis rosea is an acute, inflammatory and self-limited disease, which is characterized by a primary scaly plaque (Herald patch) followed by a generalized, symmetrical papulosqumous eruption (Mostly on trunk and proximal extremities). Objective: To determine the efficacy of erythromycin in the treatment of patients with pityriasis rosea. Patients and Methods: In this doubl...
متن کاملThe Effect of Ginger on Blood Lipid and Lipoproteins in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Double-Blind Randomized Clinical Controlled Trial
Background: Preliminary clinical trials showed that ginger improved lipid profile in type 2 diabetes patients (T2D). This trial was carried out to determine the effect of ginger on blood lipid and lipoproteins in T2D. Methods: this is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial on 88 T2D conducted in. The patients were randomly divided into two groups of ginger (GG) and placebo (PG), t...
متن کاملComparison of the Effect of Cognitive Rehabilitation and Neurofeedback on Sustained Attention Among Elementary School Students With Specific Learning Disorder: A Preliminary Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial
Introduction: Sustained Attention (SA) failure is one of the main characteristics of Specific Learning Disorders (SLD). Recent studies have reported a positive effect of Cognitive Rehabilitation (CR) and Neurofeedback (NFB) on SA in SLD. Thus, the effectiveness of CR and NFB is well understood. This preliminary study aimed to compare the effects of CR and NFB on SA among the elementary school s...
متن کاملEffects of Nigella sativa oil extract on inflammatory cytokine response and oxidative stress status in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial
Objectives: Nigella sativa is a medicinal plant that has long been used in traditional medicine for treating various conditions. Numerous animal studies provided evidences that the seed may elicit a broad anti-inflammatory/anti-oxidant activity. The aim of the present clinical trial was to evaluate anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties of Nigella sativa oil in patients with rheumatoid ar...
متن کامل