1090-P: RCT Design Risks Excluding Key Groups in Pediatric–Adult Transition Studies
Introduction: Importance of the patient-provider relationship in pediatric to adult clinic transitions is well recognized. Yet, there is a lack of evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We tested a new approach to moving endocrinology patients to adult care in an RCT. However, consent re...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Diabetes (New York, N.Y.) N.Y.), 2024-06, Vol.73 (Supplement_1), p.1 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | Supplement_1 |
container_start_page | 1 |
container_title | Diabetes (New York, N.Y.) |
container_volume | 73 |
creator | LIU, YING-TING MORGAN, MARCI SHAH, SEJAL HSU, LIANA DESAI, DIMPI SUH, BAILEY CHEN, JULIE LAL, RAYHAN HUGHES, MICHAEL S. |
description | Introduction: Importance of the patient-provider relationship in pediatric to adult clinic transitions is well recognized. Yet, there is a lack of evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We tested a new approach to moving endocrinology patients to adult care in an RCT. However, consent requirements of the RCT posed challenges. We therefore examined whether this skewed enrollment, inadvertently precluding the very patients we sought to assist.
Methods: Participants age ≥16 with a chronic endocrine condition transferring from Stanford's pediatric to adult endocrinology clinics were randomized 2:1 to "Guided Transfer" (starting care with an adult physician in the pediatric clinic before moving) or "Direct Referral" (beginning adult care in adult clinic). To identify potential biases after enrollment ceased in Nov 2023, we reviewed enrollment efforts, compared participants' demographics to the age-matched population of patients in the 4 most commonly referring clinics, and surveyed referring providers. Data collection on the primary outcome, attendance in two adult clinic visits, is ongoing.
Results: Of 119 candidates, 34% were unreachable despite 256 cumulative contact attempts. 45 enrollees were randomized to GT and 21 to DR; 82% had diabetes. Compared to the age-matched clinic population (n=2169), enrollees were significantly more white (59% vs 38%, p |
doi_str_mv | 10.2337/db24-1090-P |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_3111275942</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3111275942</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c642-524b9ce4004d273e60a1b8b610a8866dec55c02086e4994e6844720163ffb9d03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotkM1KAzEUhYMoWKsrXyDgUkZvfiaZuCu1rWLBUkdwF2aSTEmtMzWZAbvzHXxDn8Qplbs4m--cCx9ClwRuKGPy1paUJwQUJIsjNCCKqYRR-XaMBgCEJkQqeYrOYlwDgOhvgF4P9B1ejnN876Jf1Xjp43vEky-z6ayvV_jJ7fAsNN02Yl_jhbO-aIM3v98_I9ttWpyHoo6-9U2NX9q-4uI5OqmKTXQX_zlE-XSSjx-S-fPscTyaJ0ZwmqSUl8o4DsAtlcwJKEiZlYJAkWVCWGfS1ACFTDiuFHci41xSIIJVVakssCG6OsxuQ_PZudjqddOFuv-oGSGEylRx2lPXB8qEJsbgKr0N_qMIO01A77XpvTa9F6EX7A-9214G</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3111275942</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>1090-P: RCT Design Risks Excluding Key Groups in Pediatric–Adult Transition Studies</title><source>EZB Electronic Journals Library</source><creator>LIU, YING-TING ; MORGAN, MARCI ; SHAH, SEJAL ; HSU, LIANA ; DESAI, DIMPI ; SUH, BAILEY ; CHEN, JULIE ; LAL, RAYHAN ; HUGHES, MICHAEL S.</creator><creatorcontrib>LIU, YING-TING ; MORGAN, MARCI ; SHAH, SEJAL ; HSU, LIANA ; DESAI, DIMPI ; SUH, BAILEY ; CHEN, JULIE ; LAL, RAYHAN ; HUGHES, MICHAEL S.</creatorcontrib><description>Introduction: Importance of the patient-provider relationship in pediatric to adult clinic transitions is well recognized. Yet, there is a lack of evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We tested a new approach to moving endocrinology patients to adult care in an RCT. However, consent requirements of the RCT posed challenges. We therefore examined whether this skewed enrollment, inadvertently precluding the very patients we sought to assist.
Methods: Participants age ≥16 with a chronic endocrine condition transferring from Stanford's pediatric to adult endocrinology clinics were randomized 2:1 to "Guided Transfer" (starting care with an adult physician in the pediatric clinic before moving) or "Direct Referral" (beginning adult care in adult clinic). To identify potential biases after enrollment ceased in Nov 2023, we reviewed enrollment efforts, compared participants' demographics to the age-matched population of patients in the 4 most commonly referring clinics, and surveyed referring providers. Data collection on the primary outcome, attendance in two adult clinic visits, is ongoing.
Results: Of 119 candidates, 34% were unreachable despite 256 cumulative contact attempts. 45 enrollees were randomized to GT and 21 to DR; 82% had diabetes. Compared to the age-matched clinic population (n=2169), enrollees were significantly more white (59% vs 38%, p<0.001) and privately insured (73% vs 43%, p<0.001). Among providers (n=13), 85% felt GT provided a benefit to patients. Key themes regarding improvement areas included eliminating consent needs, including all participants in GT, and enhancing monitoring and communication methods.
Conclusion: RCTs are prone to recruitment and enrollment bias in this population, missing those who might benefit most from the intervention, such as harder to contact or underserved individuals. Providers recognized RCT challenges but still favored the GT approach. A single-arm QI-based study may reduce barriers and improve demographic representation.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0012-1797</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1939-327X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2337/db24-1090-P</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: American Diabetes Association</publisher><subject>Clinical trials ; Clinics ; Demography ; Diabetes mellitus ; Endocrinology ; Pediatrics</subject><ispartof>Diabetes (New York, N.Y.), 2024-06, Vol.73 (Supplement_1), p.1</ispartof><rights>Copyright American Diabetes Association Jun 2024</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>LIU, YING-TING</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MORGAN, MARCI</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SHAH, SEJAL</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HSU, LIANA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DESAI, DIMPI</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SUH, BAILEY</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CHEN, JULIE</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>LAL, RAYHAN</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HUGHES, MICHAEL S.</creatorcontrib><title>1090-P: RCT Design Risks Excluding Key Groups in Pediatric–Adult Transition Studies</title><title>Diabetes (New York, N.Y.)</title><description>Introduction: Importance of the patient-provider relationship in pediatric to adult clinic transitions is well recognized. Yet, there is a lack of evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We tested a new approach to moving endocrinology patients to adult care in an RCT. However, consent requirements of the RCT posed challenges. We therefore examined whether this skewed enrollment, inadvertently precluding the very patients we sought to assist.
Methods: Participants age ≥16 with a chronic endocrine condition transferring from Stanford's pediatric to adult endocrinology clinics were randomized 2:1 to "Guided Transfer" (starting care with an adult physician in the pediatric clinic before moving) or "Direct Referral" (beginning adult care in adult clinic). To identify potential biases after enrollment ceased in Nov 2023, we reviewed enrollment efforts, compared participants' demographics to the age-matched population of patients in the 4 most commonly referring clinics, and surveyed referring providers. Data collection on the primary outcome, attendance in two adult clinic visits, is ongoing.
Results: Of 119 candidates, 34% were unreachable despite 256 cumulative contact attempts. 45 enrollees were randomized to GT and 21 to DR; 82% had diabetes. Compared to the age-matched clinic population (n=2169), enrollees were significantly more white (59% vs 38%, p<0.001) and privately insured (73% vs 43%, p<0.001). Among providers (n=13), 85% felt GT provided a benefit to patients. Key themes regarding improvement areas included eliminating consent needs, including all participants in GT, and enhancing monitoring and communication methods.
Conclusion: RCTs are prone to recruitment and enrollment bias in this population, missing those who might benefit most from the intervention, such as harder to contact or underserved individuals. Providers recognized RCT challenges but still favored the GT approach. A single-arm QI-based study may reduce barriers and improve demographic representation.</description><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Clinics</subject><subject>Demography</subject><subject>Diabetes mellitus</subject><subject>Endocrinology</subject><subject>Pediatrics</subject><issn>0012-1797</issn><issn>1939-327X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNotkM1KAzEUhYMoWKsrXyDgUkZvfiaZuCu1rWLBUkdwF2aSTEmtMzWZAbvzHXxDn8Qplbs4m--cCx9ClwRuKGPy1paUJwQUJIsjNCCKqYRR-XaMBgCEJkQqeYrOYlwDgOhvgF4P9B1ejnN876Jf1Xjp43vEky-z6ayvV_jJ7fAsNN02Yl_jhbO-aIM3v98_I9ttWpyHoo6-9U2NX9q-4uI5OqmKTXQX_zlE-XSSjx-S-fPscTyaJ0ZwmqSUl8o4DsAtlcwJKEiZlYJAkWVCWGfS1ACFTDiuFHci41xSIIJVVakssCG6OsxuQ_PZudjqddOFuv-oGSGEylRx2lPXB8qEJsbgKr0N_qMIO01A77XpvTa9F6EX7A-9214G</recordid><startdate>20240614</startdate><enddate>20240614</enddate><creator>LIU, YING-TING</creator><creator>MORGAN, MARCI</creator><creator>SHAH, SEJAL</creator><creator>HSU, LIANA</creator><creator>DESAI, DIMPI</creator><creator>SUH, BAILEY</creator><creator>CHEN, JULIE</creator><creator>LAL, RAYHAN</creator><creator>HUGHES, MICHAEL S.</creator><general>American Diabetes Association</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20240614</creationdate><title>1090-P: RCT Design Risks Excluding Key Groups in Pediatric–Adult Transition Studies</title><author>LIU, YING-TING ; MORGAN, MARCI ; SHAH, SEJAL ; HSU, LIANA ; DESAI, DIMPI ; SUH, BAILEY ; CHEN, JULIE ; LAL, RAYHAN ; HUGHES, MICHAEL S.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c642-524b9ce4004d273e60a1b8b610a8866dec55c02086e4994e6844720163ffb9d03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Clinics</topic><topic>Demography</topic><topic>Diabetes mellitus</topic><topic>Endocrinology</topic><topic>Pediatrics</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>LIU, YING-TING</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MORGAN, MARCI</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SHAH, SEJAL</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HSU, LIANA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DESAI, DIMPI</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SUH, BAILEY</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CHEN, JULIE</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>LAL, RAYHAN</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HUGHES, MICHAEL S.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><jtitle>Diabetes (New York, N.Y.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>LIU, YING-TING</au><au>MORGAN, MARCI</au><au>SHAH, SEJAL</au><au>HSU, LIANA</au><au>DESAI, DIMPI</au><au>SUH, BAILEY</au><au>CHEN, JULIE</au><au>LAL, RAYHAN</au><au>HUGHES, MICHAEL S.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>1090-P: RCT Design Risks Excluding Key Groups in Pediatric–Adult Transition Studies</atitle><jtitle>Diabetes (New York, N.Y.)</jtitle><date>2024-06-14</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>73</volume><issue>Supplement_1</issue><spage>1</spage><pages>1-</pages><issn>0012-1797</issn><eissn>1939-327X</eissn><abstract>Introduction: Importance of the patient-provider relationship in pediatric to adult clinic transitions is well recognized. Yet, there is a lack of evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We tested a new approach to moving endocrinology patients to adult care in an RCT. However, consent requirements of the RCT posed challenges. We therefore examined whether this skewed enrollment, inadvertently precluding the very patients we sought to assist.
Methods: Participants age ≥16 with a chronic endocrine condition transferring from Stanford's pediatric to adult endocrinology clinics were randomized 2:1 to "Guided Transfer" (starting care with an adult physician in the pediatric clinic before moving) or "Direct Referral" (beginning adult care in adult clinic). To identify potential biases after enrollment ceased in Nov 2023, we reviewed enrollment efforts, compared participants' demographics to the age-matched population of patients in the 4 most commonly referring clinics, and surveyed referring providers. Data collection on the primary outcome, attendance in two adult clinic visits, is ongoing.
Results: Of 119 candidates, 34% were unreachable despite 256 cumulative contact attempts. 45 enrollees were randomized to GT and 21 to DR; 82% had diabetes. Compared to the age-matched clinic population (n=2169), enrollees were significantly more white (59% vs 38%, p<0.001) and privately insured (73% vs 43%, p<0.001). Among providers (n=13), 85% felt GT provided a benefit to patients. Key themes regarding improvement areas included eliminating consent needs, including all participants in GT, and enhancing monitoring and communication methods.
Conclusion: RCTs are prone to recruitment and enrollment bias in this population, missing those who might benefit most from the intervention, such as harder to contact or underserved individuals. Providers recognized RCT challenges but still favored the GT approach. A single-arm QI-based study may reduce barriers and improve demographic representation.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>American Diabetes Association</pub><doi>10.2337/db24-1090-P</doi></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0012-1797 |
ispartof | Diabetes (New York, N.Y.), 2024-06, Vol.73 (Supplement_1), p.1 |
issn | 0012-1797 1939-327X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_3111275942 |
source | EZB Electronic Journals Library |
subjects | Clinical trials Clinics Demography Diabetes mellitus Endocrinology Pediatrics |
title | 1090-P: RCT Design Risks Excluding Key Groups in Pediatric–Adult Transition Studies |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-07T16%3A08%3A30IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=1090-P:%20RCT%20Design%20Risks%20Excluding%20Key%20Groups%20in%20Pediatric%E2%80%93Adult%20Transition%20Studies&rft.jtitle=Diabetes%20(New%20York,%20N.Y.)&rft.au=LIU,%20YING-TING&rft.date=2024-06-14&rft.volume=73&rft.issue=Supplement_1&rft.spage=1&rft.pages=1-&rft.issn=0012-1797&rft.eissn=1939-327X&rft_id=info:doi/10.2337/db24-1090-P&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3111275942%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3111275942&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |