Hide metadata

dc.contributor.authorWerner, Erik L
dc.contributor.authorLøchting, Ida
dc.contributor.authorStorheim, Kjersti
dc.contributor.authorGrotle, Margreth
dc.date.accessioned2018-05-29T05:50:13Z
dc.date.available2018-05-29T05:50:13Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.identifier.citationBMC Family Practice. 2018 May 22;19(1):71
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10852/61759
dc.description.abstractBackground Cluster randomized controlled trials are often used in research in primary care but creates challenges regarding biases and confounders. We recently presented a study on low back pain from primary care in Norway with equal effects in the intervention and the control group. In order to understand the specific mechanisms that may produce biases in a cluster randomized trial we conducted a focus group study among the participating health care providers. The aim of this study was to understand how the participating providers themselves influenced on the study and thereby possibly on the results of the cluster randomized controlled trial. Methods The providers were invited to share their experiences from their participation in the COPE study, from recruitment of patients to accomplishment of either the intervention or control consultations. Six clinicians from the intervention group and four from the control group took part in the focus group interviews. The group discussions focused on feasibility of the study in primary care and particularly on identifying potential biases and confounders in the study. The audio-recorded interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed according to a systematic text condensation. The themes for the analysis emerged from the group discussions. Results A personal interest for back pain, logistic factors at the clinics and an assessment of the patients’ capacity to accomplish the study prior to their recruitment was reported. The providers were allowed to provide additional therapy to the intervention and it turned out that some of these could be regarded as opposed to the messages of the intervention. The providers seemed to select different items from the educational package according to personal beliefs and their perception of the patients’ acceptance. Conclusion The study disclosed several potential biases to the COPE study which may have impacted on the study results. Awareness of these is highly important when planning and conducting a cluster randomized controlled trial. Procedures in the recruitment of both providers and patients seem to be key factors and the providers should be aware of their role in a scientific study in order to standardize the provision of the intervention.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.rightsThe Author(s).
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.titleA focus group study to understand biases and confounders in a cluster randomized controlled trial on low back pain in primary care in Norway
dc.typeJournal article
dc.date.updated2018-05-29T05:50:16Z
dc.creator.authorWerner, Erik L
dc.creator.authorLøchting, Ida
dc.creator.authorStorheim, Kjersti
dc.creator.authorGrotle, Margreth
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-018-0759-9
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:no-64362
dc.type.documentTidsskriftartikkel
dc.type.peerreviewedPeer reviewed
dc.identifier.fulltextFulltext https://www.duo.uio.no/bitstream/handle/10852/61759/1/12875_2018_Article_759.pdf
dc.type.versionPublishedVersion
cristin.articleid71


Files in this item

Appears in the following Collection

Hide metadata

Attribution 4.0 International
This item's license is: Attribution 4.0 International