Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Risk based monitoring (RBM) tools for clinical trials: A systematic review.
Hurley, Caroline; Shiely, Frances; Power, Jessica; Clarke, Mike; Eustace, Joseph A; Flanagan, Evelyn; Kearney, Patricia M.
Affiliation
  • Hurley C; Dept. Epidemiology and Public Health, University College Cork, Ireland. Electronic address: carolinehurley@ucc.ie.
  • Shiely F; Dept. Epidemiology and Public Health, University College Cork, Ireland; Health Research Board - Clinical Research Facility, University College Cork, Ireland.
  • Power J; Centre for Global Health, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland.
  • Clarke M; Centre for Public Health, Queen's University Belfast, Ireland.
  • Eustace JA; Health Research Board - Clinical Research Facility, University College Cork, Ireland.
  • Flanagan E; Health Research Board - Clinical Research Facility, University College Cork, Ireland.
  • Kearney PM; Dept. Epidemiology and Public Health, University College Cork, Ireland.
Contemp Clin Trials ; 51: 15-27, 2016 11.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27641969
INTRODUCTION: In November 2016, the Integrated Addendum to ICH-GCP E6 (R2) will advise trial sponsors to develop a risk-based approach to clinical trial monitoring. This new process is commonly known as risk based monitoring (RBM). To date, a variety of tools have been developed to guide RBM. However, a gold standard approach does not exist. This review aims to identify and examine RBM tools. METHODS: Review of published and grey literature using a detailed search-strategy and cross-checking of reference lists. This review included academic and commercial instruments that met the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) classification of RBM tools. RESULTS: Ninety-one potential RBM tools were identified and 24 were eligible for inclusion. These tools were published between 2000 and 2015. Eight tools were paper based or electronic questionnaires and 16 operated as Service as a System (SaaS). Risk associated with the investigational medicinal product (IMP), phase of the clinical trial and study population were examined by all tools and suitable mitigation guidance through on-site and centralised monitoring was provided. CONCLUSION: RBM tools for clinical trials are relatively new, their features and use varies widely and they continue to evolve. This makes it difficult to identify the "best" RBM technique or tool. For example, equivalence testing is required to determine if RBM strategies directed by paper based and SaaS based RBM tools are comparable. Such research could be embedded within multi-centre clinical trials and conducted as a SWAT (Study within a Trial).
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Risk / Clinical Trials as Topic / Clinical Trials Data Monitoring Committees Type of study: Etiology_studies / Guideline / Qualitative_research / Risk_factors_studies / Systematic_reviews Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Journal subject: MEDICINA / TERAPEUTICA Year: 2016 Document type: Article Country of publication: United States

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Risk / Clinical Trials as Topic / Clinical Trials Data Monitoring Committees Type of study: Etiology_studies / Guideline / Qualitative_research / Risk_factors_studies / Systematic_reviews Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Journal subject: MEDICINA / TERAPEUTICA Year: 2016 Document type: Article Country of publication: United States