The methodology for developing a prospective meta-analysis in the family planning community
Author
Turok, DavidEspey, Eve
Edelman, Alison
Lotke, Pamela
Lathrop, Eva
Teal, Stephanie
Jacobson, Janet
Simonsen, Sara
Schulz, Kenneth
Affiliation
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah, USADepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA
Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado, USA
Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, Division of Public Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
Quantitative Sciences, Family Health International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA
Issue Date
2011
Metadata
Show full item recordPublisher
BioMed CentralCitation
Turok et al. Trials 2011, 12:104 http://www.trialsjournal.com/content/12/1/104Journal
TrialsRights
© 2011 Turok et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0).Collection Information
This item is part of the UA Faculty Publications collection. For more information this item or other items in the UA Campus Repository, contact the University of Arizona Libraries at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.Abstract
BACKGROUND:Prospective meta-analysis (PMA) is a collaborative research design in which individual sites perform randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and pool the data for meta-analysis. Members of the PMA collaboration agree upon specific research interventions and outcome measures, ideally before initiation but at least prior to any individual trial publishing results. This allows for uniform reporting of primary and secondary outcomes. With this approach, heterogeneity among trials contributing data for the final meta-analysis is minimized while each site maintains the freedom to design a specific trial. This paper describes the process of creating a PMA collaboration to evaluate the impact of misoprostol on ease of intrauterine device (IUD) insertion in nulliparous women.METHODS:After the principal investigator developed a preliminary PMA protocol, he identified potential collaborating investigators at other sites. One site already had a trial underway and another site was in the planning stages of a trial meeting PMA requirements. Investigators at six sites joined the PMA collaborative. Each site committed to enroll subjects to meet a pre-determined total sample size. A final common research plan and site responsibilities were developed and agreed upon through email and face-to-face meetings. Each site committed to contribute individual patient data to the PMA collaboration, and these data will be analyzed and prepared as a multi-site publication. Individual sites retain the ability to analyze and publish their site's independent findings.RESULTS:All six sites have obtained Institutional Review Board approval and each has obtained individual funding to meet the needs of that site's study. Sites have shared resources including study protocols and consents to decrease costs and improve study flow. This PMA protocol is registered with the Cochrane Collaboration and data will be analyzed according to Cochrane standards for meta-analysis.CONCLUSIONS:PMA is a novel research method that improves meta-analysis by including several study sites, establishing uniform reporting of specific outcomes, and yet allowing some independence on the part of individual sites with respect to the conduct of research. The inclusion of several sites increases statistical power to address important clinical questions. Compared to multi-center trials, PMA methodology encourages collaboration, aids in the development of new investigators, decreases study costs, and decreases time to publication.TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00613366, NCT00886834, NCT01001897, NCT01147497 and NCT01307111EISSN
1745-6215Version
Final published versionAdditional Links
http://www.trialsjournal.com/content/12/1/104ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1186/1745-6215-12-104
Scopus Count
Collections
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as © 2011 Turok et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0).

