Pilot test of an accrual Common Metric for the NIH Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) Consortium: Metric usefulness. Issue 1 (22nd September 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Peterson, Laura E.; Daudelin, Denise H.; Welch, Lisa C.; Parajulee, Anshu; Selker, Harry P.
• Is Part Of: Journal of clinical and translational science. Volume 5:Issue 1(2021)
• Publication Date: 2020-09-22
• Subjects: Performance improvement, -- common metrics, -- translational science, -- study accrual, -- CTSA; Clinical medicine -- Research -- Periodicals; Medicine, Experimental -- Periodicals; Human experimentation in medicine -- Periodicals; 616.027
• DOI: 10.1017/cts.2020.544
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2059-8661

Abstract

Abstract: The Common Metrics Initiative aims to develop and field metrics to improve research processes within the national Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Consortium. A Median Accrual Ratio (MAR) common metric was developed to assess the results of efforts to increase subject accrual into a set of clinical trials within the expected time period. A pilot test of the MAR was undertaken at Tufts Clinical and Translational Science Institute (CTSI) with eight CTSA Consortium hubs. Post-pilot interviews were conducted with 9 CTSA Principal Investigators (PIs) and 23 pilot team members. Over three-quarters (78%) of respondents reported that the MAR could be useful for performance improvement, but also described limitations or concerns. The most commonly cited barrier to MAR use for performance improvement was difficulty in interpreting the single value that is produced. Most respondents were interested in using the MAR to assess recruitment at an individual trial level. Majority of respondents (63%) had mixed opinions about aggregating metric results across the CTSA Consortium for comparison or benchmarking. Collecting data about additional contextual factors, and comparing accrual between subgroups, were cited as potentially helping address concerns about aggregation. Significant challenges remain in ensuring that the MAR can be sufficiently useful for collaborative process improvement. We offer recommendations to potentially improve metric usefulness.