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
. 2025 May-Jun;74(3):241-245.
doi: 10.1097/NNR.0000000000000802. Epub 2024 Dec 16.

A Decision-Making Grid for Coenrollment in Multiple Clinical Trials

A Decision-Making Grid for Coenrollment in Multiple Clinical Trials

Martha A Q Curley et al. Nurs Res. 2025 May-Jun.

Abstract

Background: Although subject coenrollment into multiple trials is desirable, thoughtful consideration is required to avoid compromising each trial's scientific integrity.

Objective: We developed a Decision-Making Grid (GRID) to help investigators determine whether a clinical trial is compatible with a second clinical trial, thus allowing coenrollment, or if it should be considered competing, prohibiting coenrollment.

Methods: The GRID evaluates 21 elements across four domains: scientific integrity, data interpretation, feasibility/burden, and additional considerations. Optimally, each principal investigator shares their protocol, completes the GRID independently, and then meets to compare their perspectives, seeking a mutually acceptable agreement.

Results: The GRID has facilitated coenrollment decision-making for the RESTORE and PROSpect pediatric critical care clinical trials. In RESTORE , five trials were reviewed; one was approved for coenrollment, and four were deemed competing. In PROSpect , 26 trials have been reviewed; 20 are approved for coenrollment, and six were deemed competing. In both RESTORE and PROSpect , the principal investigators of multiple trials arranged a mutually acceptable sharing agreement.

Discussion: The GRID provides a systematic process to help investigators evaluate the effect of coenrollment in multiple clinical trials.

Keywords: clinical trials; coenrollment; decision support technique.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

References

    1. Anisetti B., Rost N., Barrett K., Gottesman R., Graff-Radford J., Kittner S., Boden-Albala B., Cissel H., Mills B., Carman K., Vemuri P., Wruck L., Bhapkar M., Donahue K., Gupta S., Meschia J. F. (2022). Looking for opportunities to co-enroll: The DISCOVERY study experience. Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases , 31, 106862. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2022.106862 - DOI
    1. Beardsall K., Brocklehurst P., Ahluwalia J. (2008). Should newborn infants be excluded from multiple research studies? The Lancet , 372, 503–505. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61200-3 - DOI
    1. Brankovic M., Kardys I., Steyerberg E. W., Lemeshow S., Markovic M., Rizopoulos D., Boersma E. (2019). Understanding of interaction (subgroup) analysis in clinical trials. European Journal of Clinical Investigation , 49, e13145. https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.13145 - DOI
    1. Cafferty F. H., Coyle C., Rowley S., Berkman L., MacKensie M., Langley R. E. (2017). Co-enrolment of participants into multiple cancer trials: Benefits and challenges. Clinical Oncology , 29, e126–e133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clon.2017.02.014 - DOI
    1. Cook D., Ferguson N. D., Hand L., Austin P., Zhou Q., Adhikari N. K. J., Danesh V., Arabi Y., Matte A. L., Clarke F. E., Mehta S., Smith O., Wise M. P., Friedrich J. O., Keenan S. P., Hanna S., Meade M. O.; OSCILLation for ARDS Treated Early Investigators, Canadian Critical Care Trials Group. (2015). Coenrollment in a randomized trial of high-frequency oscillation: Prevalence, patterns, predictors, and outcomes. Critical Care Medicine , 43, 328–338. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000000692 - DOI

LinkOut - more resources