Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Defining the Features of Registry Based Randomised Controlled Trials (rRCT): A Systematic Review
View through CrossRef
Abstract
Background: Registry Based Randomised Controlled Trials have been described as pragmatic studies utilising patient data embedded in large scale registries, to facilitate key clinical trial procedures such as case report completion, randomisation and follow up data. While the practice of utilising registries to support the conduct of randomised trials is increasing, the reporting of how a registry is used within a trial can vary, causing difficulty in identifying registry based randomised trials and interpreting their exact definition. Methods: The databases PubMed, Embase, Cinahl Plus, Scopus and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be searched using a combination of subject headings, MeSH and free text terms. Search terms will be adapted accordingly for each database, with English language articles included and no other filters applied. Also, grey literature and reference lists will be searched, contacting trial authors for clarification when necessary. Two independent reviewers will complete study screening, selection and quality assessment. A preliminary synthesis will be conducted tabulating the relevant evidence into separate data extraction tables. A narrative synthesis approach will be adopted based on the Guidance on the Conduct of Narrative Synthesis in Systematic Reviews.Results: The present study will synthesise existing registry based randomised trial literature and define their key features.Conclusions: It is essential that trialists and researchers can review published trials and endeavour to duplicate trial designs. There is a lack of consensus in terms of the reporting of registry based randomised trials, making replication of this emerging trial design difficult. This review will clearly summarise and define the key features of these randomised trials, to allow researchers understand and reproduce the novel registry based randomised controlled trial methodology. Systematic Review Registration: PROPSERO CRD42020192419
Title: Defining the Features of Registry Based Randomised Controlled Trials (rRCT): A Systematic Review
Description:
Abstract
Background: Registry Based Randomised Controlled Trials have been described as pragmatic studies utilising patient data embedded in large scale registries, to facilitate key clinical trial procedures such as case report completion, randomisation and follow up data.
While the practice of utilising registries to support the conduct of randomised trials is increasing, the reporting of how a registry is used within a trial can vary, causing difficulty in identifying registry based randomised trials and interpreting their exact definition.
Methods: The databases PubMed, Embase, Cinahl Plus, Scopus and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be searched using a combination of subject headings, MeSH and free text terms.
Search terms will be adapted accordingly for each database, with English language articles included and no other filters applied.
Also, grey literature and reference lists will be searched, contacting trial authors for clarification when necessary.
Two independent reviewers will complete study screening, selection and quality assessment.
A preliminary synthesis will be conducted tabulating the relevant evidence into separate data extraction tables.
A narrative synthesis approach will be adopted based on the Guidance on the Conduct of Narrative Synthesis in Systematic Reviews.
Results: The present study will synthesise existing registry based randomised trial literature and define their key features.
Conclusions: It is essential that trialists and researchers can review published trials and endeavour to duplicate trial designs.
There is a lack of consensus in terms of the reporting of registry based randomised trials, making replication of this emerging trial design difficult.
This review will clearly summarise and define the key features of these randomised trials, to allow researchers understand and reproduce the novel registry based randomised controlled trial methodology.
Systematic Review Registration: PROPSERO CRD42020192419.
Related Results
Evaluating the Science to Inform the Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans Midcourse Report
Evaluating the Science to Inform the Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans Midcourse Report
Abstract
The Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans (Guidelines) advises older adults to be as active as possible. Yet, despite the well documented benefits of physical a...
Current therapeutic strategies for erectile function recovery after radical prostatectomy – literature review and meta-analysis
Current therapeutic strategies for erectile function recovery after radical prostatectomy – literature review and meta-analysis
Radical prostatectomy is the most commonly performed treatment option for localised prostate cancer. In the last decades the surgical technique has been improved and modified in or...
Do evidence summaries increase health policy‐makers' use of evidence from systematic reviews? A systematic review
Do evidence summaries increase health policy‐makers' use of evidence from systematic reviews? A systematic review
This review summarizes the evidence from six randomized controlled trials that judged the effectiveness of systematic review summaries on policymakers' decision making, or the most...
Registry-based randomised controlled trials: conduct, advantages and challenges—a systematic review
Registry-based randomised controlled trials: conduct, advantages and challenges—a systematic review
Abstract
Background
Registry-based randomised controlled trials (rRCTs) have been described as pragmatic studies utilising patient data embedded in ...
Registry-Based Randomized Controlled Trials: Conduct, Advantages and Challenges – A Systematic Review.
Registry-Based Randomized Controlled Trials: Conduct, Advantages and Challenges – A Systematic Review.
Abstract
Background: Registry-based Randomized Controlled Trials (rRCTs) have been described as pragmatic studies utilising patient data embedded in large scale registries,...
Efficacy and safety of probiotics in the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials using ROME IV criteria v1
Efficacy and safety of probiotics in the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials using ROME IV criteria v1
Systematic review 1. * Review title. Efficacy and safety of probiotics in the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinica...
Cash‐based approaches in humanitarian emergencies: a systematic review
Cash‐based approaches in humanitarian emergencies: a systematic review
This Campbell systematic review examines the effectiveness, efficiency and implementation of cash transfers in humanitarian settings. The review summarises evidence from five studi...
How is missing data handled in cluster randomized controlled trials? A review of trials published in the NIHR Journals Library 1997–2024
How is missing data handled in cluster randomized controlled trials? A review of trials published in the NIHR Journals Library 1997–2024
Background:
Cluster randomized controlled trials are increasingly used to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions in clinical and public health research. However, m...


