Adjudication-related processes are underreported and lack standardization in clinical trials of venous thromboembolism: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES Although the use of an adjudication committee (AC) for outcomes is recommended in randomized controlled trials, there are limited data on the process of adjudication. We therefore aimed to assess whether the reporting of the adjudication process in venous thromboembolism (VTE) trials meets existing quality standards and which characteristics of trials influence the use of an AC. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING We systematically searched MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library from January 1, 2003, to June 1, 2012, for randomized controlled trials on VTE. We abstracted information about characteristics and quality of trials and reporting of adjudication processes. We used stepwise backward logistic regression model to identify trial characteristics independently associated with the use of an AC. RESULTS We included 161 trials. Of these, 68.9% (111 of 161) reported the use of an AC. Overall, 99.1% (110 of 111) of trials with an AC used independent or blinded ACs, 14.4% (16 of 111) reported how the adjudication decision was reached within the AC, and 4.5% (5 of 111) reported on whether the reliability of adjudication was assessed. In multivariate analyses, multicenter trials [odds ratio (OR), 8.6; 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.7, 27.8], use of a data safety-monitoring board (OR, 3.7; 95% CI: 1.2, 11.6), and VTE as the primary outcome (OR, 5.7; 95% CI: 1.7, 19.4) were associated with the use of an AC. Trials without random allocation concealment (OR, 0.3; 95% CI: 0.1, 0.8) and open-label trials (OR, 0.3; 95% CI: 0.1, 1.0) were less likely to report an AC. CONCLUSION Recommended processes of adjudication are underreported and lack standardization in VTE-related clinical trials. The use of an AC varies substantially by trial characteristics.

The big picture: causes of compromised outcome of complex statutory adjudications in Australia

Statutory adjudication has been enacted progressively throughout Australia on a stat-by-state basis over a period of 10 years. The legislation with more emphasis on the Eastern States has come under much criticism recently for failing to facilitate decisions of sufficient quality with respect to complex adjudications. This paper reviews this criticism and discusses the key causes of the unsatisfactory outcome of complex adjudications in Australia. The identified causes are namely flawed appointment, relaxed eligibility and regulation, intimidation of adjudicators, fuzzy jurisdictional boundaries, abbreviated timeframes, limited inquisitorial powers and want of review mechanism. The implication of the research is a better understanding of the nature of the quality of complex adjudication outcome and the relevant worthwhile reform opportunities in Australia, especially with regard to introducing legislative review mechanisms.

Will the application of spatial multi criteria evaluation technique enhance the quality of decision-making to resolve boundary conflicts in the Philippines?

Systematic studies that evaluate the quality of decision-making processes are relatively rare. Using the literature on decision quality, this research develops a framework to assess the quality of decision-making processes for resolving boundary conflicts in the Philippines. The evaluation framework breaks down the decision-making process into three components (the decision procedure, the decision method, and the decision unit) and is applied to two ex-post (one resolved and one unresolved) and one ex-ante cases. The evaluation results from the resolved and the unresolved cases show that the choice of decision method plays a minor role in resolving boundary conflicts whereas the choice of decision procedure is more influential. In the end, a decision unit can choose a simple method to resolve the conflict. The ex-ante case presents a follow-up intended to resolve the unresolved case for a changing decision-making process in which the associated decision unit plans to apply the spatial multi criteria evaluation (SMCE) tool as a decision method. The evaluation results from the ex-ante case confirm that the SMCE has the potential to enhance the decision quality because: a) it provides high quality as a decision method in this changing process, and b) the weaknesses associated with the decision unit and the decision procedure of the unresolved case were found to be eliminated in this process.

Decision examines wrongdoers and liability

In Ligon Sixty-Three Pty Ltd v ClarkeKann [2015] QSC 153 the court considered an application to join parties as defendants when it was alleged they were concurrent wrongdoers for the purpose of the proportionate liability provisions of the Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) (the Act).

A proposed roadmap to optimise the adjudication of complex payment disputes in Australia

In Australia, statutory construction adjudication has recently received a lot of criticism due to the increasing amount of determinations that have been quashed upon judicial review, and anecdotal evidence from some quarters showing dissatisfaction with the quality of adjudication decisions. Such criticism is particularly aimed at adjudications of large and technically and legally complex payment disputes, where adjudicators are under pressure to consider substantial volumes of submissions in very tight timeframes. More specifically, criticisms have been directed at, inter alia, adjudicator’s regulations, procedural fairness, jurisdictional powers and finality of decisions. This paper reviews the measures to improve the quality of adjudications of complex payment disputes then proposes a roadmap by selecting the Qld model as a benchmark but suggesting further improvements identified and explained via specific steps or pit stops. The pit stops include criteria for timeframes of complex claims, appointment, regulation and powers of adjudicators and a review system on the merits to control the quality of adjudication decisions replicating the Singapore model. The findings remain as blunt instruments and deemed as hypotheses to inform subsequent empirical research which the authors are currently undertaking to further investigate, strengthen and validate the findings of this study in order to propose a reliable and useful guide to any parliament seeking to optimise its statutory adjudication to effectively deal with complex payment disputes.

Tourism Destination Preferences: A Longitudinal Analysis of Consumer Decision Sets

There have only been a small number of applications of consumer decision set theory to holiday destination choice, and these studies have tended to rely on a single cross sectional snapshot of research participants’ stated preferences. Very little has been reported on the relationship between stated destination preferences and actual travel, or changes in decision set composition over time. The paper presents a rare longitudinal examination of destination decision sets, in the context of short break holidays by car in Queensland, Australia. Two questionnaires were administered, three months apart. The first identified destination preferences while the second examined actual travel and revisited destination preferences. In relation to the conference theme, there was very little change in consumer preferences towards the competitive set of destinations over the three month period. A key implication for the destination of interest, which, in an attempt to change market perceptions, launched a new brand campaign during the period of the project, is that a long term investment in a consistent brand message will be required to change market perceptions. The results go some way to support the proposition that the positioning of a destination into a consumer’s decision set represents a source of competitive advantage.