Cerebrovascular diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
Barriers and Facilitators to Intracerebral Haemorrhage Platform Trial Recruitment: A Survey of Stroke Clinicians.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
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.
Boldbaatar Anuka, Moullaali Tom J, MacRaild Allan, Risbridger Sarah, Hosking Alice, Richardson Connor, Clay Gwynneth A, Dennis Martin, Sprigg Nikola, Barber Mark, Parry-Jones Adrian R, Weir Christopher J, Werring David J, Al-Shahi Salman Rustam, Samarasekera Neshika
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Platform trials are an efficient trial design which enables testing of multiple interventions simultaneously. They could advance knowledge of treatments for intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH). We aimed to investigate the views of clinicians involved in stroke research on recruitment to a future platform trial for ICH.
METHODS: Between April and July 2025, we conducted a UK-wide online survey of clinicians actively involved in stroke research using convenience sampling through professional organisations. Participants considered factors related to the consent process and research environment and could provide optional free text responses about additional barriers or facilitators to recruitment. We used descriptive statistics for quantitative data and content analysis for qualitative data.
RESULTS: Among 73 respondents, 46 (63%) were female, 36 (49%) were stroke physicians, 24 (33%) nurses, 6 (8%) allied health professionals, and 7 (10%) were in other roles. A total of 35 (48%) had >20 years' clinical experience, 44 (60%) reported spending <10% of their role in research. 66 (90%) thought that a platform trial would be a good option for testing interventions for patients with stroke due to ICH. Across 11 modifiable factors, clinicians most frequently rated the perceived importance of the research question and a research-positive culture in the clinical team as facilitators of recruitment (both 92%), while clinician preference for specific treatments was most frequently rated as a barrier (48%). Two themes emerged from free text responses: study design and infrastructure. Regarding study design, respondents perceived consent procedures (n = 9), study materials (n = 8), study procedures (n = 8), eligibility assessment (n = 6), the research question (n = 3), and randomisation (n = 3) as important for a future platform trial. Regarding infrastructure, emergent factors were staffing (n = 17), local research culture and capacity (n = 9), research governance and delivery (n = 6), and training (n = 6).
CONCLUSION: The overwhelming majority of respondents from the UK clinical stroke community supported a platform trial for ICH, although the influence of survey responder bias is unknown.
METHODS: Between April and July 2025, we conducted a UK-wide online survey of clinicians actively involved in stroke research using convenience sampling through professional organisations. Participants considered factors related to the consent process and research environment and could provide optional free text responses about additional barriers or facilitators to recruitment. We used descriptive statistics for quantitative data and content analysis for qualitative data.
RESULTS: Among 73 respondents, 46 (63%) were female, 36 (49%) were stroke physicians, 24 (33%) nurses, 6 (8%) allied health professionals, and 7 (10%) were in other roles. A total of 35 (48%) had >20 years' clinical experience, 44 (60%) reported spending <10% of their role in research. 66 (90%) thought that a platform trial would be a good option for testing interventions for patients with stroke due to ICH. Across 11 modifiable factors, clinicians most frequently rated the perceived importance of the research question and a research-positive culture in the clinical team as facilitators of recruitment (both 92%), while clinician preference for specific treatments was most frequently rated as a barrier (48%). Two themes emerged from free text responses: study design and infrastructure. Regarding study design, respondents perceived consent procedures (n = 9), study materials (n = 8), study procedures (n = 8), eligibility assessment (n = 6), the research question (n = 3), and randomisation (n = 3) as important for a future platform trial. Regarding infrastructure, emergent factors were staffing (n = 17), local research culture and capacity (n = 9), research governance and delivery (n = 6), and training (n = 6).
CONCLUSION: The overwhelming majority of respondents from the UK clinical stroke community supported a platform trial for ICH, although the influence of survey responder bias is unknown.