Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Oct 24:15:406.
doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-406.

Eligibility determination for clinical trials: development of a case review process at a chiropractic research center

Robert D Vining  1 , Stacie A Salsbury, Katherine A Pohlman
Affiliations

Eligibility determination for clinical trials: development of a case review process at a chiropractic research center

Robert D Vining et al. Trials. .

Abstract

Background: Systematic procedures addressing the limitations of eligibility determination are needed to improve the quality of participant recruitment and enrollment in randomized clinical trials. This paper describes an eligibility determination process developed by and in use at a chiropractic research center engaged in community recruitment for clinical trials studying spinal pain conditions.

Methods: A team of investigators developed a case review process for application across clinical trials involving chiropractic care. Study personnel representing key study roles including research clinicians, study coordinators, a project manager, and at least one investigator convene in person to determine eligibility for participants following baseline study visit examinations. The research clinician who performed the eligibility examination presents the case and a moderator leads the case review panel through a structured discussion including diagnosis, eligibility criteria, definition review, and clinical precautions. Panel members provide clinical recommendations and determine final eligibility using a structured and moderated voting process.

Results: Through the case review process for three externally funded clinical trials for participants with neck and low back pain, we presented 697 cases, rendering 472 participants eligible for enrollment and excluding 225 individuals. The most common reasons for case review exclusions across the three trials included neck or back pain not meeting diagnostic classifications, safety concerns related to treatment or testing, referral for further evaluation or treatment, and compliance concerns.

Conclusions: The case review process uses the expertise of study coordinators, research clinicians, project managers, and investigators to render eligibility decisions consistent with study aims for the duration of the trial. This formal eligibility determination process includes steps designed to mitigate the potential for participant misclassification from clinician advocacy or misunderstanding of eligibility criteria, and helps ensure that participants can safely take part in study procedures.

Trial registration: The three trials discussed in this article were registered in ClinicalTrials.gov with the ID numbers of NCT00830596 (27 January 2009), NCT01312233 (04 March 2011), and NCT01765751 (30 May 2012).

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Case review flowchart for the manual cervical distraction trial (Trial 3). Yellow boxes, case review moderator process; Light grey boxes, study coordinator process; Dark grey boxes, research clinician process; Green boxes, senior clinician process; Purple boxes, case review panel process.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Case review flowchart for the spinal manipulation and sensorimotor function trial (Trial 1). Light grey boxes, study coordinator process; Dark grey boxes, research clinician process; Green boxes, senior clinician process; Purple boxes, case review panel process.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Case review flowchart for the collaborative care trial (Trial 2). Light grey boxes, study coordinator process; Dark grey boxes, research clinician process; Green boxes, senior clinician process; Purple boxes, case review panel process.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Eligibility decisions from the multi-staged determination process for the manual cervical distraction trial (Trial 3).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Macias WL, Vallet B, Bernard GR, Vincent JL, Laterre PF, Nelson DR, Derchak PA, Dhainaut JF. Sources of variability on the estimate of treatment effect in the PROWESS trial: implications for the design and conduct of future studies in severe sepsis. Crit Care Med. 2004;32:2385–2391. doi: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000147440.71142.AC. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kasai T, Ohe Y, Nishio K, Kunitoh H, Tamura T, Sekine I, Kubota K, Yamamoto N, Nakamura Y, Shinkai T, Kodama T, Saijo N. Factors that influence the eligibility of cases for inclusion in clinical trials. The Lung Cancer Chemotherapy Study Group of the Japan Clinical Oncology Group. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 1998;28:214–221. doi: 10.1093/jjco/28.3.214. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Fink E, Kokku PK, Nikiforou S, Hall LO, Goldgof DB, Krischer JP. Selection of patients for clinical trials: an interactive web-based system. Artif Intell Med. 2004;31:241–254. doi: 10.1016/j.artmed.2004.01.017. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Papaconstantinou C, Theocharous G, Mahadevan S. An expert system for assigning patients into clinical trials based on Bayesian networks. J Med Syst. 1998;22:189–202. doi: 10.1023/A:1022667800953. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Simpson F, Sweetman EA, Doig GS. A systematic review of techniques and interventions for improving adherence to inclusion and exclusion criteria during enrolment into randomised controlled trials. Trials. 2010;11:17. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-11-17. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data