Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

A scoping review shows that several nonvalidated budget planning tools for randomized trials are available


Speich, Benjamin; Gloy, Viktoria; Schur, Nadine; Ewald, Hannah; Hemkens, Lars G; Schwenkglenks, Matthias; Briel, Matthias (2019). A scoping review shows that several nonvalidated budget planning tools for randomized trials are available. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 117:9-19.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES
We aimed to provide a systematic overview of freely available tools which may help plan or monitor costs for randomized clinical trials (RCTs).
STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING
We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and EconLit and conducted internet searches via Google (last search, October 2018). We included all freely available tools and determined their specific purpose, which parts of clinical trial projects and which types of costs they covered, and if they were user-tested or validated in any form.
RESULTS
We identified 25 available tools. Most tools were downloadable on websites from institutions related to clinical research. Seven tools were developed to plan the budget for an entire RCT, 17 tools for calculating budgets of an individual trial center, and one tool for monitoring costs of ongoing RCTs. Eighteen tools considered fixed, variable, and indirect costs. Only two tools were clearly user-tested or validated.
CONCLUSION
Several freely available tools aim to support investigators in planning costs of an entire trial or in planning the budget for a clinical trial site. How valid and useful they are remains to be shown for most of them. Future tools should be openly shared, user-tested, and validated.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES
We aimed to provide a systematic overview of freely available tools which may help plan or monitor costs for randomized clinical trials (RCTs).
STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING
We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and EconLit and conducted internet searches via Google (last search, October 2018). We included all freely available tools and determined their specific purpose, which parts of clinical trial projects and which types of costs they covered, and if they were user-tested or validated in any form.
RESULTS
We identified 25 available tools. Most tools were downloadable on websites from institutions related to clinical research. Seven tools were developed to plan the budget for an entire RCT, 17 tools for calculating budgets of an individual trial center, and one tool for monitoring costs of ongoing RCTs. Eighteen tools considered fixed, variable, and indirect costs. Only two tools were clearly user-tested or validated.
CONCLUSION
Several freely available tools aim to support investigators in planning costs of an entire trial or in planning the budget for a clinical trial site. How valid and useful they are remains to be shown for most of them. Future tools should be openly shared, user-tested, and validated.

Statistics

Citations

Dimensions.ai Metrics
2 citations in Web of Science®
2 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Additional indexing

Contributors:MAking Randomized Trials Affordable (MARTA) Group
Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute (EBPI)
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Scopus Subject Areas:Health Sciences > Epidemiology
Language:English
Date:15 September 2019
Deposited On:05 Dec 2019 11:45
Last Modified:29 Jul 2020 11:57
Publisher:Elsevier
ISSN:0895-4356
OA Status:Closed
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.09.009
PubMed ID:31533072

Download

Full text not available from this repository.
View at publisher

Get full-text in a library