Accelerating the development of a perinatal platform trial to efficiently evaluate the effectiveness of multiple interventions in perinatal care.

<ns5:p> Background We aimed to design and deliver a novel, ambitious perinatal platform to efficiently evaluate the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of multiple comparisons concurrently, recognising the inextricable link between pregnant women and babies. Methods We undertook extensive groundwork, holding discussions, focus groups, and conducting statistical simulations to explore and develop methodology to deliver a platform of trials. This included: <ns5:list list-type="bullet"> <ns5:list-item> <ns5:p>1. building sustainable partnerships across disciplines with expertise in the delivery of perinatal and platform trials</ns5:p> </ns5:list-item> <ns5:list-item> <ns5:p>2. developing governance processes for selection of comparisons by multi-stakeholder oversight</ns5:p> </ns5:list-item> <ns5:list-item> <ns5:p>3. setting up all aspects of project delivery</ns5:p> </ns5:list-item> <ns5:list-item> <ns5:p>4. developing the IT systems/framework for data collection processes/data flows</ns5:p> </ns5:list-item> <ns5:list-item> <ns5:p>5. working with parents, women and national charities to ensure integral public involvement</ns5:p> </ns5:list-item> <ns5:list-item> <ns5:p>6. exploring views of healthcare professionals about the design/conduct of a perinatal platform trial</ns5:p> </ns5:list-item> <ns5:list-item> <ns5:p>7. developing/refining required methodologies</ns5:p> </ns5:list-item> </ns5:list> Results The main output from the accelerator award was a Stage 1 application to NIHR for a perinatal platform trial. Unfortunately, our bid was unsuccessful. The breadth of the network and of the planned work presented many challenges. However, we showed that collaboration across several clinical trials units/institutions is possible. Conclusions As long as institutions and individual researchers are primarily judged by research income, competition inevitably makes such endeavours complicated. Governance and legal aspects have yet to evolve sufficiently to reassure host institutions regarding risk management across multiple studies and institutions. It was imperative that our proposed platform allowed adaptations beyond adding or removing interventions. We created an agile infrastructure whereby new comparisons could be added. However, developing such an infrastructure that is futureproofed requires considerable upfront investment, which offsets many of the efficiencies that platform trials promise. None of these challenges were insurmountable. We have created a blueprint for the design and conduct of streamlined perinatal trials. </ns5:p>

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
NIHR Open Research
Published
2026-06-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3310/nihropenres.14207.1
Primary Topic
Ethics in Clinical Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Accelerating the development of a perinatal platform trial to efficiently evaluate the effectiveness of multiple interventions in perinatal care.

Eleanor Mitchell, Munyaradzi Dimairo, Julia Sanders, Rachel Plachcinski et al.
NIHR Open Research
Ethics in Clinical Research
article

Accelerating the development of a perinatal platform trial to efficiently evaluate the effectiveness of multiple interventions in perinatal care.

Eleanor Mitchell, Munyaradzi Dimairo, Julia Sanders, Rachel Plachcinski, Caroline Lee-Davey, M Bradburn, Kayleigh Stanbury, Christopher Partlett, Kate Walker, Linda Fiaschi, JANE P. DANIELS, Chris Gale, Christina Cole, Shalini Ojha, Jon S. Dorling, Edmund Juszczak, Pollyanna Hardy, Marian Knight, Oliver Rivero Arias, D W Murray, Paul Leighton, Andrew King, C C Roehr, Faye Martin, Nigel Simpson, Garry Meakin, Samantha Johnson, Richard Welsh, Hayley James
article en

Abstract

<ns5:p> Background We aimed to design and deliver a novel, ambitious perinatal platform to efficiently evaluate the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of multiple comparisons concurrently, recognising the inextricable link between pregnant women and babies. Methods We undertook extensive groundwork, holding discussions, focus groups, and conducting statistical simulations to explore and develop methodology to deliver a platform of trials. This included: <ns5:list list-type="bullet"> <ns5:list-item> <ns5:p>1. building sustainable partnerships across disciplines with expertise in the delivery of perinatal and platform trials</ns5:p> </ns5:list-item> <ns5:list-item> <ns5:p>2. developing governance processes for selection of comparisons by multi-stakeholder oversight</ns5:p> </ns5:list-item> <ns5:list-item> <ns5:p>3. setting up all aspects of project delivery</ns5:p> </ns5:list-item> <ns5:list-item> <ns5:p>4. developing the IT systems/framework for data collection processes/data flows</ns5:p> </ns5:list-item> <ns5:list-item> <ns5:p>5. working with parents, women and national charities to ensure integral public involvement</ns5:p> </ns5:list-item> <ns5:list-item> <ns5:p>6. exploring views of healthcare professionals about the design/conduct of a perinatal platform trial</ns5:p> </ns5:list-item> <ns5:list-item> <ns5:p>7. developing/refining required methodologies</ns5:p> </ns5:list-item> </ns5:list> Results The main output from the accelerator award was a Stage 1 application to NIHR for a perinatal platform trial. Unfortunately, our bid was unsuccessful. The breadth of the network and of the planned work presented many challenges. However, we showed that collaboration across several clinical trials units/institutions is possible. Conclusions As long as institutions and individual researchers are primarily judged by research income, competition inevitably makes such endeavours complicated. Governance and legal aspects have yet to evolve sufficiently to reassure host institutions regarding risk management across multiple studies and institutions. It was imperative that our proposed platform allowed adaptations beyond adding or removing interventions. We created an agile infrastructure whereby new comparisons could be added. However, developing such an infrastructure that is futureproofed requires considerable upfront investment, which offsets many of the efficiencies that platform trials promise. None of these challenges were insurmountable. We have created a blueprint for the design and conduct of streamlined perinatal trials. </ns5:p>

NIHR Open ResearchVol. 6
University of Leeds (GB), University of Nottingham (GB), University of Leicester (GB), University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust (GB), University of Oxford (GB), Bliss (GB), National Childbirth Trust (GB), Imperial College London (GB), Cardiff University (GB), University of Sheffield (GB), University of Wales (GB)
Chiesi Farmaceutici, National Institute for Health and Care Research, Department of Health and Social Care, Medical Research Council, Health Technology Assessment Programme, Research for Patient Benefit Programme
Partnerships for the goals
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Ethics in Clinical Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.