Skip to content

Research at St Andrews

Trial Forge Guidance 2: how to decide if a further Study Within A Trial (SWAT) is needed

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Author(s)

Shaun Treweek, Simon Bevan, Peter Bower, Matthias Briel, Marion Campbell, Jacquie Christie, Clive Collett, Seonaidh Cotton, Declan Devane, Adel El Feky, Sandra Galvin, Heidi Gardner, Katie Gillies, Kerenza Hood, Jan Jansen, Roberta Littleford, Adwoa Parker, Craig Ramsay, Lynne Restrup, Frank Sullivan & 7 more David Torgerson, Liz Tremain, Erik von Elm, Matthew Westmore, Hywel Williams, Paula R Williamson, Mike Clarke

School/Research organisations

Abstract

The evidence base available to trialists to support trial process decisions—e.g. how best to recruit and retain participants, how to collect data or how to share the results with participants—is thin. One way to fill gaps in evidence is to run Studies Within A Trial, or SWATs. These are self-contained research studies embedded within a host trial that aim to evaluate or explore alternative ways of delivering or organising a particular trial process.

SWATs are increasingly being supported by funders and considered by trialists, especially in the UK and Ireland. At some point, increasing SWAT evidence will lead funders and trialists to ask: given the current body of evidence for a SWAT, do we need a further evaluation in another host trial? A framework for answering such a question is needed to avoid SWATs themselves contributing to research waste.

This paper presents criteria on when enough evidence is available for SWATs that use randomised allocation to compare different interventions.

Close

Details

Original languageEnglish
Article number33
Number of pages9
JournalTrials
Volume21
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 7 Jan 2020

Discover related content
Find related publications, people, projects and more using interactive charts.

View graph of relations

Related by author

  1. Drivers of the opioid crisis: An appraisal of financial conflicts of interest in clinical practice guideline panels at the peak of opioid prescribing

    Spithoff, S., Leece, P., Sullivan, F., Persaud, N., Belesiotis, P. & Steiner, L., 24 Jan 2020, In : PLoS ONE. 15, 1, 15 p., e0227045.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  2. Choosing Wisely Canada campaign associated with less overuse of thyroid testing: retrospective parallel cohort study

    Wintemute, K., Greiver, M., McIsaac, W., Del Giudice, M. E., Sullivan, F., Aliarzadeh, B., Kalia, S., Meaney, C., Moineddin, R. & Singer, A., 13 Nov 2019, In : Canadian Family Physician. 65, 11, p. e487-e496

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  3. The "All of Us" Research Program

    Sullivan, F., McKinstry, B. & Vasishta, S., 7 Nov 2019, In : New England Journal of Medicine. 381, 19, p. 1883-1885 3 p.

    Research output: Contribution to journalLetter

  4. Opioid agonist therapy during residential treatment of opioid use disorder: cohort study on access and outcomes

    Spithoff, S., Meaney, C., Urbanoski, K., Harrington, K., Que, B., Kahan, M., Leece, P., Shehadeh, V. & Sullivan, F., 11 Oct 2019, In : Canadian Family Physician. 65, 10, p. e443-e452 10 p.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  5. Effect on treatment adherence of distributing essential medicines at no charge: the CLEAN Meds randomized clinical trial

    Persaud, N., Bedard, M., Boozary, A. S., Glazier, R. H., Gomes, T., Hwang, S. W., Jüni, P., Law, M. R., Mamdani, M. M., Manns, B. J., Martin, D., Morgan, S. G., Oh, P. I., Pinto, A. D., Shah, B. R., Sullivan, F., Umali, N., Thorpe, K. E., Tu, K., Laupacis, A. & 1 others, for the Carefully Selected and Easily Accessible at No Charge Medicines (CLEAN Meds) Study Team, 7 Oct 2019, In : JAMA Internal Medicine. Online First

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Related by journal

  1. Pharmacokinetics, SAfety/tolerability, and EFficacy of high-dose RIFampicin in tuberculosis-HIV co-infected patients on efavirenz- or dolutegravir-based antiretroviral therapy: study protocol for an open-label phase II clinical trial (SAEFRIF)

    Nabisere, R., Musaazi, J., Denti, P., Aber, F., Lamorde, M., Dooley, K. E., Aarnoutse, R., Sloan, D. J. & Sekaggya-Wiltshire, C., 13 Feb 2020, In : Trials. 21, 9 p., 181.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  2. Factors associated with recruitment to randomised controlled trials in general practice: protocol for a systematic review

    Moffat, K. R., Cannon, P., Shi, W. & Sullivan, F., 10 May 2019, In : Trials. 20, 4 p., 66.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  3. The effect of optimised patient information materials on recruitment in a lung cancer screening trial: an embedded randomised recruitment trial

    Parker, A., Knapp, P., Treweek, S., Madhurasinghe, V., Littleford, R., Gallant, S., Sullivan, F., Schembri, S., Rick, J., Graffy, J., Collier, D. J., Eldridge, S., Kennedy, A. & Bower, P., 18 Sep 2018, In : Trials. 19

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  4. Trial Forge Guidance 1: what is a Study Within A Trial (SWAT)?

    Treweek, S., Bevan, S., Bower, P., Campbell, M., Christie, J., Clarke, M., Collett, C., Cotton, S., Devane, D., El Feky, A., Flemyng, E., Galvin, S., Gardner, H., Gillies, K., Jansen, J., Littleford, R., Parker, A., Ramsay, C., Restrup, L., Sullivan, F. & 4 others, Torgerson, D., Tremain, L., Westmore, M. & Williamson, P. R., 23 Feb 2018, In : Trials. 19, 5 p., 139.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

ID: 265773206

Top