Patient and public involvement is suboptimal in randomized controlled trials addressing a chronic condition.

OBJECTIVES: To describe patient and public involvement (PPI) in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) addressing a chronic condition and to analyze whether PPI is associated with trial characteristics. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We used PubMed search to identify RCTs addressing a chronic condition and published in journals with a mandatory PPI statement. RESULTS: Across 101 RCTs; 40 (40%) reported PPI at any stage of the research process. PPI contribution occurred mostly at the design stage of RCTs (n = 36), especially for assessing the burden of the intervention (n = 24), and at the conduct stage (n = 21), with the elaboration of communication materials (n = 14). Less than one-third (13/40) of RCTs included PPI in the development or choice of outcome measures. As compared with non-PPI RCTs, PPI RCTs more frequently were published in The BMJ, had a corresponding author from the United Kingdom, reported a public funding source, had a higher inclusion rate, used usual care as a control and evaluated a digital intervention. PPI RCTs were associated with less frequent use of placebo as a control group. CONCLUSION: Our results underline that PPI is not uncommon in RCTs of chronic conditions but infrequently occurred at a key stage. Yet, the engagement of patients as a real partner in RCTs of chronic conditions should be enhanced.

COVID-19 trials were not more likely to report intent to share individual data than non-COVID-19 trials in ClinicalTrials.gov.

OBJECTIVES: To compare intent to share individual participant data (IPD) between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 trials registered at ClinicalTrials.gov between 01/09/2020, and 01/03/2021. We also evaluated factors independently associated with intent to share IPD and whether intent to share IPD has improved as compared with the prepandemic period. METHODS: We searched ClinicalTrials.gov for all interventional phase 3 studies registered between 01/09/2020, and 01/03/2021. Then, we identified COVID-19 trials and selected a random sample of non-COVID-19 trials with a ratio 2:1. We compared the intent to share IPD between these trials and with 292 trials registered between 01/12/2019, and 01/03/2020 (prepandemic period). RESULTS: We included 148 COVID-19 trials and 296 non-COVID-19 trials. Intent to share IPD did not significantly differ between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 trials (22.3% vs. 27.0%, P = 0.3). Intent to share IPD was independently associated with industry-sponsorship (odds ratio [OR] = 2.92; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.65-5.27) and location in the United States (OR = 2.93; 95% CI: 1.64-5.41) or the European Union (OR = 2.06; 95% CI: 1.03-4.19). The intent to share IPD has not significantly improved compared with the prepandemic period (P = 0.16). CONCLUSION: Data-sharing intent at registration does not seem better for COVID-19 trials.