Five-year review of an international clinical research-training program

The exponential increase in clinical research has profoundly changed medical sciences. Evidence that has accumulated in the past three decades from clinical trials has led to the proposal that clinical care should not be based solely on clinical expertise and patient values, and should integrate robust data from systematic research. As a consequence, clinical research has become more complex and methods have become more rigorous, and evidence is usually not easily translated into clinical practice. Therefore, the instruction of clinical research methods for scientists and clinicians must adapt to this new reality. To address this challenge, a global distance-learning clinical research-training program was developed, based on collaborative learning, the pedagogical goal of which was to develop critical thinking skills in clinical research. We describe and analyze the challenges and possible solutions of this course after 5 years of experience (2008-2012) with this program. Through evaluation by students and faculty, we identified and reviewed the following challenges of our program: 1) student engagement and motivation, 2) impact of heterogeneous audience on learning, 3) learning in large groups, 4) enhancing group learning, 5) enhancing social presence, 6) dropouts, 7) quality control, and 8) course management. We discuss these issues and potential alternatives with regard to our research and background.

Polymyalgia Rheumatica (PMR) Special Interest Group at OMERACT 11: outcomes of importance for patients with PMR

We worked toward developing a core outcome set for clinical research studies in polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) by conducting (1) patient consultations using modified nominal group technique; (2) a systematic literature review of outcome measures in PMR; (3) a pilot observational study of patients presenting with untreated PMR, and further discussion with patient research partners; and (4) a qualitative focus group study of patients with PMR on the meaning of stiffness, using thematic analysis. (1) Consultations included 104 patients at 4 centers. Symptoms of PMR included pain, stiffness, fatigue, and sleep disturbance. Function, anxiety, and depression were also often mentioned. Participants expressed concerns about diagnostic delay, adverse effects of glucocorticoids, and fear of relapse. (2) In the systematic review, outcome measures previously used for PMR include pain visual analog scores (VAS), morning stiffness, blood markers, function, and quality of life; standardized effect sizes posttreatment were large. (3) Findings from the observational study indicated that asking about symptom severity at 7 AM, or "on waking," appeared more relevant to disease activity than asking about symptom severity "now" (which depended on the time of assessment). (4) Preliminary results were presented from the focus group qualitative study, encompassing broad themes of stiffness, pain, and the effect of PMR on patients' lives. It was concluded that further validation work is required before a core outcome set in PMR can be recommended. Nevertheless, the large standardized effect sizes suggest that pain VAS is likely to be satisfactory as a primary outcome measure for assessing response to initial therapy of PMR. Dissection of between-patient heterogeneity in the subsequent treatment course may require attention to comorbidity as a potential confounding factor.