Inconsistencies in Quality of Life Data Collection in Clinical Trials: A Potential Source of Bias? Interviews with Research Nurses and Trialists
Open Access
- 4 October 2013
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Public Library of Science (PLoS) in PLOS ONE
- Vol. 8 (10), e76625
- https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0076625
Abstract
Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as health-related quality of life (HRQL) are increasingly used to evaluate treatment effectiveness in clinical trials, are valued by patients, and may inform important decisions in the clinical setting. It is of concern, therefore, that preliminary evidence, gained from group discussions at UK-wide Medical Research Council (MRC) quality of life training days, suggests there are inconsistent standards of HRQL data collection in trials and appropriate training and education is often lacking. Our objective was to investigate these reports, to determine if they represented isolated experiences, or were indicative of a potentially wider problem. We undertook a qualitative study, conducting 26 semi-structured interviews with research nurses, data managers, trial coordinators and research facilitators involved in the collection and entry of HRQL data in clinical trials, across one primary care NHS trust, two secondary care NHS trusts and two clinical trials units in the UK. We used conventional content analysis to analyze and interpret our data. Our study participants reported (1) inconsistent standards in HRQL measurement, both between, and within, trials, which appeared to risk the introduction of bias; (2), difficulties in dealing with HRQL data that raised concern for the well-being of the trial participant, which in some instances led to the delivery of non-protocol driven co-interventions, (3), a frequent lack of HRQL protocol content and appropriate training and education of trial staff, and (4) that HRQL data collection could be associated with emotional and/or ethical burden. Our findings suggest there are inconsistencies in the standards of HRQL data collection in some trials resulting from a general lack of HRQL-specific protocol content, training and education. These inconsistencies could lead to biased HRQL trial results. Future research should aim to develop HRQL guidelines and training programmes aimed at supporting researchers to carry out high quality data collection.Keywords
This publication has 32 references indexed in Scilit:
- Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) in Clinical Trials: Is ‘In-Trial’ Guidance Lacking? A Systematic ReviewPLOS ONE, 2013
- Q‐TWiST analysis of ixabepilone in combination with capecitabine on quality of life in patients with metastatic breast cancerCancer, 2011
- Ethical challenges in qualitative research: examples from practiceNurse Researcher, 2010
- A Practical Guide on Incorporating and Evaluating Patient-Reported Outcomes in Clinical TrialsClinical Research and Regulatory Affairs, 2008
- Quality of life in oncology trials: a clinical guideSeminars in Radiation Oncology, 2003
- Patient-Reported Outcomes: The Example of Health-Related Quality of Life—a European Guidance Document for the Improved Integration of Health-Related Quality of Life Assessment in the Drug Regulatory ProcessDrug Information Journal, 2002
- Survey of the administration of quality of life (QL) questionnaires in three multicentre randomised trials in cancerEuropean Journal of Cancer, 1998
- Quality of life assessment in clinical trials—guidelines and a checklist for protocol writers: the U.K. Medical Research Council experienceEuropean Journal of Cancer, 1997
- BASICS OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH - STRAUSS,A, CORBIN,JJournal of Marketing Research, 1992
- Quality of Life End Points in Cancer Clinical Trials: Review and RecommendationsJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1989