Anders Daniel Andersen

Background: Wide-ranging patient recruitment not restricted to the location of the investigator will provide a better representation of the patient population in clinical studies. Objective: Our goal was to assess the feasibility of a broad web-based recruitment strategy in an 8-week observational study of 500 study participants with psoriasis and healthy controls from locations remote from the investigator and to assess the cost associated with each participant. Methods: A decentralized team in Denmark recruited patients with psoriasis and healthy controls using Google and Facebook advertisements and posts to Facebook groups. All individuals were screened via the internet, and patients diagnosed with psoriasis were included. Questionnaires regarding itch and sleep were completed by both groups at inclusion, week 4, and week 8. Results: During a 2-week recruitment period, 12,887 unique advertisement views were registered, and 839 participants were enrolled, of which 507 completed the study (220 with psoriasis and 287 healthy controls) with a retention rate of 60.4%. Participants were recruited from 11 different countries on 4 separate continents, mainly from the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. The recruitment rate was 59.9 participants per day, and the conversion rate was 57.2%. Recruitment costs were US $13 per enrolled participant and US $22 per participant completing the study. Conclusions: It is feasible and rapid to recruit a large number of participants from locations different from the investigator and to retain patients in an observational study with no visits to a clinical site at low costs.

BACKGROUND Wide-ranging patient recruitment not restricted to the location of the investigator will provide a better representation of the patient population in clinical studies. OBJECTIVE Our goal was to assess the feasibility of a broad web-based recruitment strategy in an 8-week observational study of 500 study participants with psoriasis and healthy controls from locations remote from the investigator and to assess the cost associated with each participant. METHODS A decentralized team in Denmark recruited patients with psoriasis and healthy controls using Google and Facebook advertisements and posts to Facebook groups. All individuals were screened via the internet, and patients diagnosed with psoriasis were included. Questionnaires regarding itch and sleep were completed by both groups at inclusion, week 4, and week 8. RESULTS During a 2-week recruitment period, 12,887 unique advertisement views were registered, and 839 participants were enrolled, of which 507 completed the study (220 with psoriasis and 287 healthy controls) with a retention rate of 60.4%. Participants were recruited from 11 different countries on 4 separate continents, mainly from the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. The recruitment rate was 59.9 participants per day, and the conversion rate was 57.2%. Recruitment costs were US $13 per enrolled participant and US $22 per participant completing the study. CONCLUSIONS It is feasible and rapid to recruit a large number of participants from locations different from the investigator and to retain patients in an observational study with no visits to a clinical site at low costs.

Introduction: Actinic keratosis (AK) is the most common precancerous skin condition caused by long-term UV exposure. Given the high recurrence rate of 15%–53%, identifying safe and effective treatment options is warranted. AVX001, a cytosolic phospholipase A ₂ α (cPLA ₂ α) enzyme inhibitor, is a novel anti-inflammatory drug for field-directed, self-administered, topical therapy of AK. Methods and analysis: This study is a single-centre, randomised, vehicle-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group hybrid clinical trial in adults with multiple AK lesions Olsen grade 1 or 2. The hybrid design combines decentralised participant tasks and assessments with conventional in-clinic visits. Recruitment using targeted advertising on social media and eligibility prescreening are conducted via the Studies&Me online recruitment platform. Participants (n=60) are randomly assigned to 1 of 3 treatment arms: AVX001 gel 1%, AVX001 gel 3% or vehicle gel. The trial consists of a 4-week treatment period with daily field-directed topical application of the gel and an 8-week follow-up period. Participants attend in-clinic visits at baseline, week 4 and week 12. The remote participant trial tasks include questionnaires and upload of smartphone-obtained photos of the treated skin area using a study-specific web-based app. Both remote and in-clinic assessments of safety and efficacy will be performed. The primary objective is to evaluate the local tolerability of daily application of AVX001 gel (1% or 3%) compared with vehicle gel. Secondary objectives include safety, efficacy, dose–response efficacy relationship, treatment satisfaction and cosmetic outcome. Exploratory objectives include evaluations of tolerability and efficacy assessed by dermatologists using smartphone photos uploaded by participants, comparisons of in-clinic and remote assessments and assessment of AK-related skin changes by non-invasive optical imaging. Ethics and dissemination: Approved by the Ethics Committee of the Capital Region of Denmark (H-21018064) and the Danish Medicines Agency (2021032485). Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed scientific journals. Trial registration numbers: 2021-000934-32; NCT05164393 .

Background: Digital imaging of dermatological patients is a novel approach to remote assessment and has recently become more relevant since telehealth and remote decentralized clinical trials are gaining ground. Objective: We aimed to investigate whether photographs taken by a smartphone are of adequate quality to allow severity assessments to be made and to explore the usefulness of an established atopic dermatitis severity assessment instrument on photograph evaluation. Methods: During scheduled visits in a previously published study, the investigating doctor evaluated the severity of atopic dermatitis using the Scoring AD (SCORAD) index and took photographs of the most representative lesions (target lesions) with both a smartphone and a digital single-lens reflex camera (DSLR). The photographs were then assessed by 5 dermatologists using the intensity items of the SCORAD (iSCORAD), which consists of erythema, oedema/papulation, excoriations, lichenification, oozing/crusts, and dryness (scale 0-3, maximum score 18). The mean iSCORAD of the photographs was calculated and compared with in-person assessments using Pearson correlation and Bland-Altman plots. Intraclass correlation coefficients were used for interrater reliability. Results: A total of 942 photographs from 95 patients were assessed. The iSCORAD based on smartphone photographs correlated strongly with the evaluations performed in person (iSCORAD: r=0.78, P<.001; objective SCORAD: r=0.81, P<.001; and total SCORAD: r=0.78, P<.001). For iSCORAD specifically, a Bland-Altman plot showed a difference in mean score of 1.31 for in-person and remote iSCORAD. In addition, the interrater agreement between the 5 rating dermatologists was 0.93 (95% CI 0.911-0.939). A total of 170 lesions were photographed, and the difference in mean scores was 1.32, 1.13, and 1.43 between in-person and remote evaluations based on photographs taken by a DSLR camera, a smartphone without flash, and a smartphone with flash, respectively. Conclusions: In terms of quality, remote atopic dermatitis severity assessments based on photographs are comparable to in-person assessments, and smartphone photos can be used to assess atopic dermatitis severity to a similar degree as photographs from a DSLR camera. Further, the variation in how the dermatologists in this study rated the iSCORAD based on the photographs was very low.

Background: Recruitment for clinical trials continues to be a challenge, as patient recruitment is the single biggest cause of trial delays. Around 80% of trials fail to meet the initial enrollment target and timeline, and these delays can result in lost revenue of as much as US $8 million per day for drug developing companies. Objective: This study aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis examining the effectiveness of online recruitment of participants for clinical trials compared with traditional in-clinic/offline recruitment methods. Methods: Data on recruitment rates (the average number of patients enrolled in the study per month and per day of active recruitment) and conversion rates (the percentage of participants screened who proceed to enroll into the clinical trial), as well as study characteristics and patient demographics were collected from the included studies. Differences in online and offline recruitment rates and conversion rates were examined using random effects models. Further, a nonparametric paired Wilcoxon test was used for additional analysis on the cost-effectiveness of online patient recruitment. All data analyses were conducted in R language, and P<.05 was considered significant. Results: In total, 3861 articles were screened for inclusion. Of these, 61 studies were included in the review, and 23 of these were further included in the meta-analysis. We found online recruitment to be significantly more effective with respect to the recruitment rate for active days of recruitment, where 100% (7/7) of the studies included had a better online recruitment rate compared with offline recruitment (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 4.17, P=.04). When examining the entire recruitment period in months we found that 52% (12/23) of the studies had a better online recruitment rate compared with the offline recruitment rate (IRR 1.11, P=.71). For cost-effectiveness, we found that online recruitment had a significantly lower cost per enrollee compared with offline recruitment (US $72 vs US $199, P=.04). Finally, we found that 69% (9/13) of studies had significantly better offline conversion rates compared with online conversion rates (risk ratio 0.8, P=.02). Conclusions: Targeting potential participants using online remedies is an effective approach for patient recruitment for clinical research. Online recruitment was both superior in regard to time efficiency and cost-effectiveness compared with offline recruitment. In contrast, offline recruitment outperformed online recruitment with respect to conversion rate.

BACKGROUND Digital imaging of dermatological patients is a novel approach to remote assessment and has recently become more relevant since telehealth and remote decentralized clinical trials are gaining ground. OBJECTIVE We aimed to investigate whether photographs taken by a smartphone are of adequate quality to allow severity assessments to be made and to explore the usefulness of an established atopic dermatitis severity assessment instrument on photograph evaluation. METHODS During scheduled visits in a previously published study, the investigating doctor evaluated the severity of atopic dermatitis using the Scoring AD (SCORAD) index and took photographs of the most representative lesions (target lesions) with both a smartphone and a digital single-lens reflex camera (DSLR). The photographs were then assessed by 5 dermatologists using the intensity items of the SCORAD (iSCORAD), which consists of erythema, oedema/papulation, excoriations, lichenification, oozing/crusts, and dryness (scale 0-3, maximum score 18). The mean iSCORAD of the photographs was calculated and compared with in-person assessments using Pearson correlation and Bland-Altman plots. Intraclass correlation coefficients were used for interrater reliability. RESULTS A total of 942 photographs from 95 patients were assessed. The iSCORAD based on smartphone photographs correlated strongly with the evaluations performed in person (iSCORAD: r=0.78, P<.001; objective SCORAD: r=0.81, P<.001; and total SCORAD: r=0.78, P<.001). For iSCORAD specifically, a Bland-Altman plot showed a difference in mean score of 1.31 for in-person and remote iSCORAD. In addition, the interrater agreement between the 5 rating dermatologists was 0.93 (95% CI 0.911-0.939). A total of 170 lesions were photographed, and the difference in mean scores was 1.32, 1.13, and 1.43 between in-person and remote evaluations based on photographs taken by a DSLR camera, a smartphone without flash, and a smartphone with flash, respectively. CONCLUSIONS In terms of quality, remote atopic dermatitis severity assessments based on photographs are comparable to in-person assessments, and smartphone photos can be used to assess atopic dermatitis severity to a similar degree as photographs from a DSLR camera. Further, the variation in how the dermatologists in this study rated the iSCORAD based on the photographs was very low. CLINICALTRIAL

Patient satisfaction is an important indicator of health care quality, and it remains an important goal for optimal treatment outcomes to reduce the level of misdiagnoses and inappropriate or absent therapeutic actions. Digital support tools for differential diagnosis to assist clinicians in reaching the correct diagnosis may be helpful, but how the use of these affect patients is not clear. The primary objective of this feasibility study was to investigate patient experience and satisfaction in a primary care setting where general practitioners (GPs) used a visual clinical decision support system (CDSS) compared with standard consultations. Secondary objectives were diagnostic accuracy and length of consultation. Thirty-one patients with a dermatologist-confirmed skin diagnosis were allocated to consult GPs that had been randomized to conduct either standard consultations (SDR, n = 21) or CDSS (n = 16) on two separate study days one week apart. All patients were diagnosed independently by multiple GPs (n = 3–8) in both the SDR and CDSS study arms. Using the CDSS, more patients felt involved in the decision making (P = 0.05). In addition, more patients were exposed to images during the consultations (P = 6.8e-27), and 83% of those that were shown images replied they felt better supported in the consultation. The use of CDSS significantly improved the diagnostic accuracy (34%, P = 0.007), and did not increase the duration of the consultation (median 10 minutes in both arms). This study shows for the first time that compared with standard GP consultations, CDSS assist the GP on skin related diagnoses and improve patient satisfaction and diagnostic accuracy without impacting the duration of the consultations. This is likely to increase correct treatment choices, patient adherence, and overall result in better healthcare outcomes.

BACKGROUND Recruitment for clinical trials continues to be a challenge, as patient recruitment is the single biggest cause of trial delays. Around 80% of trials fail to meet the initial enrollment target and timeline, and these delays can result in lost revenue of as much as US $8 million per day for drug developing companies. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis examining the effectiveness of online recruitment of participants for clinical trials compared with traditional in-clinic/offline recruitment methods. METHODS Data on recruitment rates (the average number of patients enrolled in the study per month and per day of active recruitment) and conversion rates (the percentage of participants screened who proceed to enroll into the clinical trial), as well as study characteristics and patient demographics were collected from the included studies. Differences in online and offline recruitment rates and conversion rates were examined using random effects models. Further, a nonparametric paired Wilcoxon test was used for additional analysis on the cost-effectiveness of online patient recruitment. All data analyses were conducted in R language, and P<.05 was considered significant. RESULTS In total, 3861 articles were screened for inclusion. Of these, 61 studies were included in the review, and 23 of these were further included in the meta-analysis. We found online recruitment to be significantly more effective with respect to the recruitment rate for active days of recruitment, where 100% (7/7) of the studies included had a better online recruitment rate compared with offline recruitment (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 4.17, P=.04). When examining the entire recruitment period in months we found that 52% (12/23) of the studies had a better online recruitment rate compared with the offline recruitment rate (IRR 1.11, P=.71). For cost-effectiveness, we found that online recruitment had a significantly lower cost per enrollee compared with offline recruitment (US $72 vs US $199, P=.04). Finally, we found that 69% (9/13) of studies had significantly better offline conversion rates compared with online conversion rates (risk ratio 0.8, P=.02). CONCLUSIONS Targeting potential participants using online remedies is an effective approach for patient recruitment for clinical research. Online recruitment was both superior in regard to time efficiency and cost-effectiveness compared with offline recruitment. In contrast, offline recruitment outperformed online recruitment with respect to conversion rate.

Pediatric Research publishes original papers, invited reviews, and commentaries on the etiologies of diseases of children and disorders of development, extending from molecular biology to epidemiology. Use of model organisms and in vitro techniques relevant to developmental biology and medicine are acceptable, as are translational human studies.