Statistical Analysis Plan for the SImPLE Trial: A Study to test if illustrations and plain language ImProve cLinical trial Education
Llewellyn, S.; Gianacas, C.; Manifold, E.; Gedye, C.
Show abstract
Background Traditional participant information and consent forms (PICFs) have changed little over time and are often lengthy and complex. A novel consent process incorporating plain language, an infographic brochure and a short explanatory video was developed to improve communication of clinical trial information. The SImPLE study was designed to evaluate whether this novel consent process improves comprehension of clinical trial information, participant engagement and the consent experience compared with a traditional PICF. Design and Setting SImPLE is a randomised two-period crossover study involving adults receiving cancer treatment who are potentially eligible for clinical trial participation. Study materials were developed for the ANZadapt (ANZUP2101) prostate cancer clinical trial; however, participants are not being recruited to ANZadapt itself. Participants are randomised to receive either a standard 17-page NHMRC-style PICF followed by a novel consent process, or the reverse sequence, with a washout period of at least 7 days between study periods. The novel consent process comprises a simplified 4-page PICF, infographic brochure and short explanatory video. Twenty-four hours following each PICF review, participants complete a comprehension assessment and structured interview. Outcomes and Endpoints The primary endpoint is comprehension of clinical trial information, measured using a study-specific 22-item questionnaire comprising 10 true/false and 12 multiple-choice questions. Secondary endpoints include acceptability, assessed through participant preference for communication format, and engagement, assessed through confidence in explaining the trial and likelihood of agreeing to participate. Planned Analyses The primary analysis will compare comprehension scores between the novel and standard consent approaches using a paired t-test among participants completing both study periods. Secondary outcomes relating to acceptability and engagement will be summarised descriptively and compared between consent approaches as appropriate. Sensitivity analyses will be performed to assess the robustness of the primary findings and the potential impact of crossover design effects.
Matching journals
The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Controlled evaLuation of Angiotensin Receptor Blockers for COVID-19 respIraTorY disease (CLARITY): Statistical analysis plan for a randomised controlled Bayesian adaptive sample size trial 95%
- Development of a consensus extension of the estimands framework for cluster randomised trials (CRT-estimands): results from an international Delphi study 93%
- Supporting Reanalysis and Reuse of Clinical Trial Data: A Case Study 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Digital delivery of Behavioural Activation therapy to overcome depression and facilitate social and economic transitions of adolescents in South Africa (the DoBAt study): protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial 94%
- Face-to-face interventions to encourage enrolment in cardiac rehabilitation; a scoping review protocol 94%
- Comparison of preprints and final journal publications from COVID-19 Studies: Discrepancies in results reporting and spin in interpretation 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Study Protocol: LIAM Mc Trial (Linking In with Advice and supports for Men impacted by Metastatic cancer) 96%
- Using numerical modelling and simulation to assess the ethical burden in clinical trials and how it relates to the proportion of responders in a trial sample 95%
- Investigating the use of a one-page infographic to improve recruitment and retention to the BASIL+ Randomised Controlled Trial: A Study Within a Trial (SWAT) 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- The use of the Registered Reports format for publication of randomized clinical trials: a cross-sectional study 94%
- Large language models for conducting systematic reviews: on the rise, but not yet ready for use – a scoping review 93%
- The impact of retracted randomised controlled trials on systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines: a meta-epidemiological study 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Scientific hypothesis generation process in clinical research: a secondary data analytic tool versus experience study protocol 93%
- The Womens Wellness After Giving Birth Program (WWAGBP) for Vietnamese women: A single-arm trial protocol 93%
- Use of digital technology tools to examine patient adherence to a prescription omega-3 polyunsaturated acids therapy intended to mitigate cardiovascular risk: protocol and preliminary demographic data from the DIAPAsOn prospective observational study 91%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.