↓ Skip to main content

A case study of SMART attributes: a qualitative assessment of generalizability, retention rate, and trial quality

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A case study of SMART attributes: a qualitative assessment of generalizability, retention rate, and trial quality
Published in
Trials, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13063-016-1368-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Erica E. M. Moodie, James C. Karran, Susan M. Shortreed

Abstract

Personalizing medical care is becoming increasingly popular, particularly mental health care. There is growing interest in formalizing medical decision making based on evolving patient symptoms in an evidence-based manner. To determine optimal sequencing of treatments, the sequences themselves must be studied; this may be accomplished by using a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART). It has been hypothesized that SMART studies may improve participant retention and generalizability. We examine the hypotheses that SMART studies are more generalizable and have better retention than traditional randomized clinical trials via a case study of a SMART study of antipsychotic medications. We considered the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) schizophrenia study, comparing the trial participant characteristics and overall retention to those of comparable trials found via a review of all related trials conducted from 2000 onwards. A MEDLINE search returned 6435 results for primary screening; ultimately, 48 distinct trials were retained for analysis. The study population in CATIE was similar to, although perhaps less symptomatic than, the study populations of traditional randomized clinical trials (RCTs), suggesting no large gains in generalizability despite the pragmatic nature of the trial. However, CATIE did see good month-by-month retention. SMARTs offer the possibility of studying treatment sequences in a way that a series of traditional RCTs cannot. SMARTs may offer improved retention; however, this case study did not find evidence to suggest greater generalizability using this trial design. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00014001 . Registered on 6 April 2001.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Other 3 6%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 15 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 22%
Psychology 8 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Mathematics 2 4%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 15 30%