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
. 2018 Feb;15(1):9-16.
doi: 10.1177/1740774517746620. Epub 2017 Dec 11.

Ethics and practice of Trials within Cohorts: An emerging pragmatic trial design

Scott Yh Kim  1   2 , James Flory  3 , Clare Relton  4
Affiliations

Ethics and practice of Trials within Cohorts: An emerging pragmatic trial design

Scott Yh Kim et al. Clin Trials. 2018 Feb.

Abstract

Background: With increasing emphasis on pragmatic trials, new randomized clinical trial designs are being proposed to enhance the "real world" nature of the data generated. We describe one such design, appropriate for unmasked pragmatic clinical trials in which the control arm receives usual care, called "Trials within Cohorts" that is increasingly used in various countries because of its efficiency in recruitment, advantages in reducing subject burden, and ability to better mimic real-world consent processes.

Methods: Descriptive, ethical, and US regulatory analysis of the Trials within Cohorts design.

Results: Trials within Cohorts design involves, after recruitment into a cohort, randomization of eligible subjects, followed by an asymmetric treatment of the two arms: those selected for the experimental arm provide informed consent for the intervention trial, while the data from the control arm are used based on prior broad permission. Thus, unlike the traditional Zelen post-randomization consent design, the cohort participants are informed about future research within the cohort; however, the extent of this disclosure currently varies among studies. Thus, ethical analysis is provided for two types of situations: when the pre-randomization disclosure and consent regarding the embedded trials are fairly explicit and detailed versus when they consist of only general statements about future data use. These differing ethical situations could have implications for how ethics review committees apply US research rules regarding waivers and alterations of informed consent.

Conclusion: Trials within Cohorts is a promising new pragmatic randomized controlled trial design that is being increasingly used in various countries. Although the asymmetric consent procedures for the experimental versus control arm subjects can initially raise ethical concerns, it is ethically superior to previous post-randomization consent designs and can have important advantages over traditional trial designs.

Keywords: Informed consent; ethics; pragmatic randomized controlled trial; pragmatic trial.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Comparison of a more detailed (left column) versus a general (right column) pre-randomization broad consent for Trials within Cohorts.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Olsen L, Aisner D, McGinnis J. The learning health-care system (IOM roundtable on evidence-based medicine) Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2007.
    1. Califf RM, Platt R. Embedding cardiovascular research into practice. JAMA. 2013;310:2037–2038. - PubMed
    1. Mitchell N, Hewitt C, Adamson J, et al. A randomised evaluation of CollAborative care and active surveillance for Screen-Positive EldeRs with sub-threshold depression (CASPER): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2011;12:225. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Relton C, Bissell P, Smith C, et al. South Yorkshire Cohort: a “cohort trials facility” study of health and weight—protocol for the recruitment phase. BMC Public Health. 2011;11:640. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Clegg A, Relton C, Young J, et al. Improving recruitment of older people to clinical trials: use of the cohort multiple randomised controlled trial design. Age Ageing. 2015;44:547–550. - PubMed

Publication types