RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Progression from external pilot to definitive randomised controlled trial: a methodological review of progression criteria reporting
JF BMJ Open
JO BMJ Open
FD British Medical Journal Publishing Group
SP e048178
DO 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-048178
VO 11
IS 6
A1 Katie Mellor
A1 Saskia Eddy
A1 Nicholas Peckham
A1 Christine M Bond
A1 Michael J Campbell
A1 Gillian A Lancaster
A1 Lehana Thabane
A1 Sandra M Eldridge
A1 Susan J Dutton
A1 Sally Hopewell
YR 2021
UL http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/11/6/e048178.abstract
AB Objectives Prespecified progression criteria can inform the decision to progress from an external randomised pilot trial to a definitive randomised controlled trial. We assessed the characteristics of progression criteria reported in external randomised pilot trial protocols and results publications, including whether progression criteria were specified a priori and mentioned in prepublication peer reviewer reports.Study design Methodological review.Methods We searched four journals through PubMed: British Medical Journal Open, Pilot and Feasibility Studies, Trials and Public Library of Science One. Eligible publications reported external randomised pilot trial protocols or results, were published between January 2018 and December 2019 and reported progression criteria. We double data extracted 25% of the included publications. Here we report the progression criteria characteristics.Results We included 160 publications (123 protocols and 37 completed trials). Recruitment and retention were the most frequent indicators contributing to progression criteria. Progression criteria were mostly reported as distinct thresholds (eg, achieving a specific target; 133/160, 83%). Less than a third of the planned and completed pilot trials that included qualitative research reported how these findings would contribute towards progression criteria (34/108, 31%). The publications seldom stated who established the progression criteria (12/160, 7.5%) or provided rationale or justification for progression criteria (44/160, 28%). Most completed pilot trials reported the intention to proceed to a definitive trial (30/37, 81%), but less than half strictly met all of their progression criteria (17/37, 46%). Prepublication peer reviewer reports were available for 153/160 publications (96%). Peer reviewer reports for 86/153 (56%) publications mentioned progression criteria, with peer reviewers of 35 publications commenting that progression criteria appeared not to be specified.Conclusions Many external randomised pilot trial publications did not adequately report or propose prespecified progression criteria to inform whether to proceed to a future definitive randomised controlled trial.Data are available upon reasonable request. Data from this review will be included in a DPhil thesis published open access through the Oxford University Archive upon KM’s DPhil completion.