"Nothing to lose and the possibility of gaining": a qualitative study on the feasibility and acceptability of registry-based randomised controlled trials among cancer patients and clinicians.

BACKGROUND: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are considered the "gold standard" for evaluating the effectiveness of interventions in clinical research. However, conventional RCTs are typically complex, expensive, and have narrow eligibility criteria, which limits generalisability. Registry-based randomised controlled trials (RRCTs) are an alternative approach that integrates the internal validity of an RCT with the external validity of a clinical registry by recruiting real-world patients and leveraging an existing registry platform for data collection. As RRCT is a novel research design, there has been limited research on the feasibility and acceptability of RRCTs from the patients' and trial team's perspectives. This study aims to explore patients', clinicians', and study coordinators' perspectives towards participation in and conduct of oncology RRCTs in Australia. METHODS: Thirty-seven semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 cancer patients, 15 clinicians, and 7 study coordinators. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. The data were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Three overarching themes were identified: (1) enablers and barriers to recruitment and enrolment of patients in RRCTs, (2) experiences of patients participating in RRCTs, and (3) recommendations for the implementation of future RRCTs. For patients, altruism and "trust in the clinician" were key reasons to participate in a RRCT. For clinicians and clinical trial coordinators, the RRCT study design was perceived as "simple and straightforward" but "less exciting" than RCTs. Competition from commercially sponsored RCTs poses challenges for investigator-led RRCTs recruitment, particularly if eligible patient numbers are low. There were limited impacts on patients' treatment experiences and clinicians' clinical workflow given that the RRCTs explored different standards of care. Recommendations to improve the enrolment of patients in RRCTs included generating greater buy-in from clinicians by increasing awareness of RRCTs via education initiatives and broader promotion of the "selling point" of RRCTs and providing monetary compensation to hospitals for enrolling patients. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst patients, clinicians, and study coordinators were generally supportive of RRCTs, several barriers to effective RRCT implementation in oncology were identified. Developing strategies to increase acceptance of the methodology by clinicians will help enhance the uptake of RRCTs in Australia and internationally.

Improving Cohort-Hospital Matching Accuracy through Standardization and Validation of Participant Identifiable Information.

Linking very large, consented birth cohorts to birthing hospitals clinical data could elucidate the lifecourse outcomes of health care and exposures during the pregnancy, birth and newborn periods. Unfortunately, cohort personally identifiable information (PII) often does not include unique identifier numbers, presenting matching challenges. To develop optimized cohort matching to birthing hospital clinical records, this pilot drew on a one-year (December 2020-December 2021) cohort for a single Australian birthing hospital participating in the whole-of-state Generation Victoria (GenV) study. For 1819 consented mother-baby pairs and 58 additional babies (whose mothers were not themselves participating), we tested the accuracy and effort of various approaches to matching. We selected demographic variables drawn from names, DOB, sex, telephone, address (and birth order for multiple births). After variable standardization and validation, accuracy rose from 10% to 99% using a deterministic-rule-based approach in 10 steps. Using cohort-specific modifications of the Australian Statistical Linkage Key (SLK-581), it took only 3 steps to reach 97% (SLK-5881) and 98% (SLK-5881.1) accuracy. We conclude that our SLK-5881 process could safely and efficiently achieve high accuracy at the population level for future birth cohort-birth hospital matching in the absence of unique identifier numbers.

Clinical registries data quality attributes to support registry-based randomised controlled trials: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Clinical registries have become an important platform for performance measurement, quality improvement, and clinical research including registry-based randomised controlled trials (RRCTs). However, the success of RRCTs is highly dependent on the quality of the registry. The aim of this study was to undertake a scoping review to identify the key characteristics that a registry must possess to be considered of high quality to successfully support the conduct of a RRCT. METHODS: A comprehensive search of four databases and grey literature was conducted. A narrative synthesis was conducted with a focus on summarising the characteristics that a high-quality registry must possess to support the conduct of RRCTs, and the mechanisms underpinning the collection of high-quality data. RESULTS: A total of 50 articles were included. Data accuracy, completeness, population capture, data standardisation, and timeliness were identified as essential data attributes of a high-quality clinical registry. The legal and ethical environment in which a registry operates, the available infrastructure support, and ongoing participation by healthcare providers were identified as impacting the collection of high-quality data. CONCLUSIONS: This review summarises the considerable work undertaken to determine the criteria with which to judge the suitability of a clinical registry to support a RRCT. Moving forward, the certification of individual clinical registries may be one way of identifying registries that can support a RRCT. In the interim, we propose the Registry Attributes Framework which can be used to ascertain the suitability of a registry to support a RRCT. Ultimately, the ideal goal should be to define minimum acceptable standards for a registry's key performance indicators (as depicted in the Framework) that would determine its certification status. New registries planned to support a RRCT should be designed and constructed against agreed standards once these are established.

Enhancing Value and Uptake for Whole-Population Cohorts of Children and Parents: Methods to Integrate Registries into the Generation Victoria Cohort.

Health registries are critical to understanding, benchmarking and improving quality of care for specific diseases and conditions, but face hurdles including funding, bias towards clinical rather than population samples, lack of pre-morbid and outcomes data, and absent cross-registry harmonisation and coordination. Children are particularly under-represented in registry research. This paper lays out novel principles, methods and governance to integrate diverse registries within or alongside a planned children's mega-cohort to rapidly generate translatable evidence. GenV (Generation Victoria) will approach for recruitment parents of all newborns (estimated 150,000) over two years from mid-2021 in the state of Victoria (population 6.5 million), Australia. Its sample size and population denominator mean it will contain almost all children with uncommon or co-morbid conditions as they emerge over time. By design, it will include linked datasets, biosamples (including from pregnancy), phenotypes and participant-reported measures, all of which will span pre-morbid to long-term outcomes. We provide a vignette of a planned new registry for high-risk pregnancies to illustrate the possibilities. To our knowledge, this is the first paper to describe such a methodology designed prospectively to enhance both the clinical relevance of a large multipurpose cohort and the value and inclusivity of registries in a population.

Defining key design elements of registry-based randomised controlled trials: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Traditional randomised controlled trials remain the gold standard for improving clinical care but they do have their limitations, including their associated high costs, high failure rate and limited external validity. An alternative methodology is the newly defined, prospective, registry-based randomised controlled trial (RRCT), where treatment and outcome data is collected in an existing registry. This scoping review explores the current literature regarding RRCTs to help identify the key design elements of RRCTs and the characteristics of clinical registries on which they are reliant on. METHODS: A scoping review methodology conducted in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines was performed. Four databases were searched for articles published from inception to June 2018: Medline; Embase; the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and; Scopus. The search strategy included MeSH and text words related to RRCT. RESULTS: We identified 2369 articles of which 75 were selected for full-text screening. Of these, only 17 articles satisfied our inclusion criteria. All studies were published between 1996 and 2017 and all were investigator-initiated. Study designs were mainly multi-site comparative/effectiveness studies incorporating the use of disease registries (n = 8), procedure registries (n = 8) and a health services registry (n = 1). The low cost, reduced administrative burden and enhanced external validity of RRCTs make them an attractive research methodology which can be used to address questions of public health importance. We identified that that there are variable definitions of what constituted a RRCT and that issues related to ethical conduct and data integrity, completeness, timeliness, validation and endpoint adjudication need to be carefully addressed. CONCLUSION: RRCTs potentially have an important role to play in informing best clinical practice and health policy. There are a number of issues that need to be addressed to optimise the utility of this approach, including establishing universally accepted criteria for the definition of a RRCT.

The impact of cultural and linguistic diversity on hospital readmission in patients hospitalized with acute heart failure.

AIMS: Health services worldwide face the challenge of providing care for increasingly culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) populations. The aims of this study were to determine whether CALD patients hospitalized with acute heart failure (HF) are at increased risk of rehospitalization and emergency department (ED) visitation after discharge, compared to non-CALD patients, and within CALD patients to ascertain the impact of limited English proficiency (LEP) on outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: A cohort of 1613 patients discharged from hospital following an episode of acute HF was derived from hospital administrative datasets. CALD status was based on both country of birth and primary spoken language. Comorbidities, HF subtype, age, sex and socioeconomic status, and hospital readmission and ED visitation incidences, were compared between groups. A Cox proportional hazard model was employed to adjust for potential confounders. The majority of patients were classified as CALD [1030 (64%)]. Of these, 488 (30%) were designated as English proficient (CALD-EP) and 542 (34%) were designated CALD-LEP. Compared to non-CALD, CALD-LEP patients exhibited a greater cumulative incidence of HF-related readmission and ED visitation, as expressed by an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) [1.27 (1.02-1.57) and 1.40 (1.18-1.67), respectively]; this difference was not significant for all-cause readmission [adjusted HR 1.03 (0.88-1.20)]. CALD-EP showed a non-significant trend towards increased rehospitalization and ED visitation. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that CALD patients with HF, in particular those designated as CALD-LEP, have an increased risk of HF rehospitalization and ED visitation. Further research to elucidate the underlying reasons for this disparity are warranted.