Back

Scoping national research infrastructure to inform the design and delivery strategy for a platform clinical trial in Parkinsons disease

Petty, R.; Zeissler, M.-L.; Agarwal, V.; Allison, J.; Bartolomeu-Pires, S.; Bartlett, M.; Croucher, R.; Collins, H.; Collins, S.; Davies, E.; Duffen, J.; Ellis-Doyle, R.; Gonzalez-Robles, C.; Inches, J.; Miller, L.; Mills, G.; Wonnacott, S.; Foltynie, T.; Carroll, C.; Mullin, S.; EJS ACT-PD Consortium,

2026-06-05 neurology
10.64898/2026.06.04.26354792 medRxiv
Show abstract

Objective To map national Parkinsons disease (PD) research capability to inform an inclusive delivery strategy for a large-scale clinical trial. Background Few people with PD participate in clinical trials, particularly from under-served populations. The Edmond J Safra Accelerating Clinical Trials in PD initiative (EJS ACT-PD) aims to deliver an inclusive multi-arm multi-stage (MAMS) disease modification PD trial. Methods A survey disseminated to National Health Service (NHS) hospitals assessed PD research capability regarding trial experience, rater expertise, trial facilities and specialist investigations. A process was developed to categorise sites into 3 tiers, with tier 1 having the least PD-research capability or experience, and tier 3 being experienced specialist centres. We mapped tiers to PD prevalence, social deprivation and ethnic diversity to identify infrastructure gaps. We developed trial delivery strategies to facilitate rapid and inclusive recruitment. Results Out of 97 survey responses, 43 sites were categorised as tier 1, 33 as tier 2 and 21 as tier 3. Diversity and social deprivation index were higher for tier 3 sites (predominantly urban). A greater proportion of tier 1 and 2 sites were situated in areas of higher PD prevalence (predominantly rural). Ninety one percent of sites reported experience with remote trial delivery methods. Our delivery strategy included: initial trial set-up at tier 3 sites to enable rapid and ethnically diverse recruitment; core funded staff within strategic sites to develop regional solutions for inclusive trial participation and to enable research opportunity provision in areas where currently very little exists, and a hybrid delivery model of in-person and remote study visits, ensuring maximal acceptability and deliverability. Conclusions The mapping of current PD research delivery capability has allowed us to develop a trial delivery strategy that will broaden the provision of research participation opportunity to under-served groups. It has also enabled existing infrastructure to be maximised while mitigating identified gaps.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
npj Parkinson's Disease
89 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
22.6%
2
Parkinsonism & Related Disorders
21 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.1%
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 21%
8.4%
4
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 2%
8.4%
5
Journal of Parkinson's Disease
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.8%
50% of probability mass above
6
Movement Disorders
62 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.4%
7
Frontiers in Neurology
91 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.1%
8
Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry
29 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.1%
9
Neurology Genetics
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
10
eClinicalMedicine
55 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.3%
11
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.3%
12
Frontiers in Digital Health
20 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.3%
13
Journal of Neurology
26 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.2%
14
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 66%
1.2%
15
Trials
25 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
16
Neurotherapeutics
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
17
BMJ Health & Care Informatics
13 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.7%
18
Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology
29 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
19
Annals of Neurology
57 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
20
Journal of the Neurological Sciences
17 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%
21
Emergency Medicine Journal
20 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.7%
22
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
23
Alzheimer's & Dementia
143 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
24
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 19%
0.5%