scholarly journals The transitioning from trials to extended follow-up studies

2014 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 635-647 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lea T Drye ◽  
Anne S Casper ◽  
Alice L Sternberg ◽  
Janet T Holbrook ◽  
Gabrielle Jenkins ◽  
...  

Background: Investigators may elect to extend follow-up of participants enrolled in a randomized clinical trial after the trial comes to its planned end. The additional follow-up may be initiated to learn about longer term effects of treatments, including adverse events, costs related to treatment, or for reasons unrelated to treatment such as to observe the natural course of the disease using the established cohort from the trial. Purpose: We examine transitioning from trials to extended follow-up studies when the goal of additional follow-up is to observe longer term treatment effects. Methods: We conducted a literature search in selected journals from 2000 to 2012 to identify trials that extended follow-up for the purpose of studying longer term treatment effects and extracted information on the operational and logistical issues in the transition. We also draw experience from three trials coordinated by the Johns Hopkins Coordinating Centers that made transitions to extended follow-up: the Alzheimer’s Disease Anti-inflammatory Prevention Trial, Multicenter Uveitis Steroid Treatment trial, and Childhood Asthma Management Program. Results: Transitions are not uncommon in multicenter clinical trials, even in trials that continued to the planned end of the trial. Transitioning usually necessitates new participant consents. If study infrastructure is not maintained during the transition, participants will be lost and re-establishing the staff and facilities will be costly. Merging data from the trial and follow-up study can be complicated by changes in data collection measures and schedules. Limitations: Our discussion and recommendations are limited to issues that we have experienced in transitions from trials to follow-up studies. Discussion: We discuss issues such as maintaining funding, institutional review board and consent requirements, contacting participants, and combining data from the trial and follow-up phases. We conclude with a list of recommendations to facilitate transitions from a trial to an extended follow-up study.

2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandra Voltolini ◽  
Gerardo Salvato ◽  
Maria Frigerio ◽  
Manlio Cipriani ◽  
Enrico Perna ◽  
...  

1969 ◽  
Vol 115 (525) ◽  
pp. 865-882 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda Lockyer ◽  
Michael Rutter

Surprisingly little is known about the course of intellectual development in children with infantile psychosis. Kanner (1943; Kanner and Lesser, 1958) has stated explicitly in several papers that “even though most of these children are initially considered feeble-minded, they are all unquestionably endowed with good cognitive potentialities, which are masked by the basic disorder” (original italics—Kanner and Lesser, 1958). The expectation would seem to be that the child's IQ, should fluctuate with the course of the psychosis, particularly the autistic aspects, but this has not been tested. It has been suggested (Anthony, 1958) that an intelligence test result in a young child with infantile psychosis is most unreliable and virtually meaningless if the child is without speech. Perhaps because most investigators have shared this view, neither of the two major follow-up studies of children with infantile psychosis, that of Kanner's cases (Eisenberg, 1956; Eisenberg and Kanner, 1956; Kanner, 1943 and 1949; Kanner and Eisenberg, 1955; Kanner and Lesser, 1958) and that of psychotic children seen by Creak (1962, 1963a and b) has included information on IQ changes.


1992 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanneke Rijken ◽  
Floor Kraaimaat ◽  
Corine de Ruiter ◽  
Bert Garssen

2009 ◽  
Vol 92 (3) ◽  
pp. S107 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Seitz ◽  
C. Gerlinger ◽  
T. Faustmann ◽  
T. Strowitzki

2009 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
pp. S95
Author(s):  
M. Curlo ◽  
L. Guida ◽  
A. Cirillo ◽  
L. Gatta ◽  
C. Papadia ◽  
...  

1988 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 209-216 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard S. Neel ◽  
Nancy Meadows ◽  
Phyllis Levine ◽  
Eugene B. Edgar

Recently there have been several follow-up studies of students who have exited special education programs (Hasazi, Gordon, & Roe, 1985; Mithaug, Horiuchi, & Fanning, 1985). These studies raise an interesting question: How well have special education programs prepared the youth they were designed to serve? This study reviews findings concerning the postschool adjustment of 160 students who were labeled behaviorally disordered at graduation from public school in the state of Washington between 1978 and 1986.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document