FreshRSS

🔒
❌ Acerca de FreshRSS
Hay nuevos artículos disponibles. Pincha para refrescar la página.
AnteayerTus fuentes RSS

Incorporating usability evaluation into iterative development of an online platform to support research participation in Parkinsons disease: a mixed methods protocol

Por: Chapman · R. · Zeissler · M.-L. · Meinert · E. · Mullin · S. · Whipps · S. · Whipps · J. · Hockey · K. · Hockey · P. · Carroll · C. B.
Introduction

Many people with Parkinson’s (PwP) are not given the opportunity or do not have adequate access to participate in clinical research. To address this, we have codeveloped with users an online platform that connects PwP to clinical studies in their local area. It enables site staff to communicate with potential participants and aims to increase the participation of the Parkinson’s community in research. This protocol outlines the mixed methods study protocol for the usability testing of the platform.

Methods and analysis

We will seek user input to finalise the platform’s design, which will then be deployed in a limited launch for beta testing. The beta version will be used as a recruitment tool for up to three studies with multiple UK sites. Usability data will be collected from the three intended user groups: PwP, care partners acting on their behalf and site study coordinators. Usability questionnaires and website analytics will be used to capture user experience quantitatively, and a purposive sample of users will be invited to provide further feedback via semistructured interviews. Quantitative data will be analysed using descriptive statistics, and a thematic analysis undertaken for interview data. Data from this study will inform future platform iterations.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethical approval was obtained from the University of Plymouth (3291; 3 May 2022). We will share our findings via a ‘Latest News’ section within the platform, presentations, conference meetings and national PwP networks.

Investigating trial design variability in trials of disease-modifying therapies in Parkinsons disease: a scoping review protocol

Por: Zeissler · M.-L. · Boey · T. · Chapman · D. · Rafaloff · G. · Dominey · T. · Raphael · K. G. · Buff · S. · Pai · H. V. · King · E. · Sharpe · P. · OBrien · F. · Carroll · C. B.
Introduction

Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a debilitating neurological disorder for which the identification of disease-modifying interventions represents a major unmet need. Diverse trial designs have attempted to mitigate challenges of population heterogeneity, efficacious symptomatic therapy and lack of outcome measures that are objective and sensitive to change in a disease modification setting. It is not clear whether consensus is emerging regarding trial design choices. Here, we report the protocol of a scoping review that will provide a contemporary update on trial design variability for disease-modifying interventions in PD.

Methods and analysis

The Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome and Study design (PICOS) framework will be used to structure the review, inform study selection and analysis. The databases MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane and the trial registry ClinicalTrials.gov will be systematically searched to identify published studies and registry entries in English. Two independent reviewers will screen study titles, abstracts and full text for eligibility, with disagreements being resolved through discussion or by a third reviewer where necessary. Data on general study information, eligibility criteria, outcome measures, trial design, retention and statistically significant findings will be extracted into a standardised form. Extracted data will be presented in a descriptive analysis. We will report our findings using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Scoping Review extension.

Ethics and dissemination

This work will provide an overview of variation and emerging trends in trial design choices for disease-modifying trials of PD. Due to the nature of this study, there are no ethical or safety considerations. We plan to publish our findings in a peer-reviewed journal.

❌