Consensus recommendations for measuring the impact of contraception on the menstrual cycle in contraceptive clinical trials.
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Mackenzie Amelia C L, Chung Stephanie, Hoppes Emily, Miller Nora, Burke Anne E, Achilles Sharon L, Allen C Leigh, Bahamondes Luis, Blithe Diana L, Brache Vivian, Callahan Rebecca L, Cartwright Alice F, Clancy Kathryn B H, Colli Enrico, Cordova-Gomez Amanda, Costenbader Elizabeth C, Creinin Mitchell D, Critchley Hilary O D, Doncel Gustavo F, Dorflinger Laneta J, Edelman Alison, Faustmann Thomas, Gerlinger Christoph, Haddad Lisa B, Hennegan Julie, Juliato Cássia Raquel Teatin, Kibira Simon P S, Mansour Diana, Martinez Andres, Matteson Kristen A, Maybin Jacqueline A, Mickler Alexandria K, Nanda Kavita, Nwachukwu Chukwuemeka E, OlaOlorun Funmilola M, Peine Kevin J, Polis Chelsea B, Vieira Carolina Sales, Sitruk-Ware Regine, Smit Jennifer A, Solomon Marsden, Soule Lisa M, Taylor Douglas, Tolley Elizabeth E, Vandeputte Olivia
Аннотация
STUDY DESIGN: We completed a formal consensus-building process with an interdisciplinary group of 57 experts from 30 organizations and 14 countries in five global regions who work across academia, nonprofit research organizations, the pharmaceutical industry, and funding agencies. Smaller topical working groups drafted and revised recommendations.
RESULTS: We developed 44 consensus recommendations, including research approaches to establish the evidence for future improvement in the measurement and analysis of CIMC data and guidance for investigators to implement presently. Priority recommendations call for simplification of terminology to make measurement accessible and patient-centered, accounting for intrinsic and extrinsic factors that may impact outcomes during study design and recruitment, standardized data collection of primary CIMC and acceptability outcomes, and harmonized approaches for analysis of these data, including addressing missing data.
CONCLUSION: By virtually convening a large group of global experts working across disciplines and sectors via a formal methodology, we developed consensus recommendations that will improve the current and future measurement and analysis of CIMC data in contraceptive clinical trials. Using these standardized approaches will permit valid and reliable contraceptive product labeling on CIMC outcomes that matter to users and greater comparability across trials that can inform clinical guidance and contraceptive counseling.
IMPLICATIONS: Consensus recommendations on measuring bleeding changes and related outcomes in contraceptive clinical trials can improve reporting of standardized, patient-centered outcomes in future product labeling. These improvements can enable healthcare providers to offer more relevant guidance on contraceptives and users to make more informed decisions about their choice of method.