Findings
Sites must establish effective data privacy and security plans, especially considering regional and global regulations like GDPR.
Risk mitigation is critical, including plans to address unanticipated issues and potential patient disengagement due to technology challenges.
Budgeting and contracting often involve additional considerations, such as storage, training, and technical support requirements for connected devices.
Sites require adequate training to ensure staff and patients are prepared to use connected devices efficiently.
Companion applications or services often play an essential role in device functionality and data transmission.

Recommendations
Develop a clear plan for data pathways, including storage, security, and regulatory compliance.
Establish detailed risk mitigation and management strategies to handle unexpected challenges.
Ensure comprehensive training programs for site staff and patients to enhance device usability.
Incorporate device storage and resource allocation into budgeting and contracting processes.
Facilitate effective communication with sponsors and vendors to resolve operational and technical issues promptly.

Regulatory Considerations
Ensure connected devices comply with CFR 21, Part 11, and other relevant data collection and transmission regulations.
Understand and adhere to local and regional data privacy laws, such as GDPR, when managing patient data.
Verify that appropriate licenses and regulatory approvals are in place for device data transmission and storage.
Assess and address shipping and handling regulations for devices, ensuring safe and compliant transportation.

Findings
The development of this standardized questionnaire highlights a critical gap in clinical research: the lack of a consistent method for collecting participant feedback. It implicitly finds that understanding the patient experience is essential for addressing issues like high dropout rates and patient burden. The tool's detailed sections suggest that factors from communication and scheduling to technology usability and visit burden are key determinants of a participant's trial experience.

Recommendations
The resource strongly recommends that sponsors and research sites proactively gather structured feedback directly from study participants. It advises using this tool to identify specific pain points in trial design and execution. The underlying recommendation is to adopt a more patient-centric and human-centered approach by integrating participant feedback into the continuous improvement of clinical trial protocols and operations, ultimately boosting recruitment and retention.

Regulatory Considerations
While not a formal regulatory guidance document, the tool supports the principles of patient-focused drug development (PFDD) encouraged by regulatory bodies like the FDA. Collecting data on the patient experience can help demonstrate that a trial's design and conduct minimizes undue burden and is ethically sound. This feedback can be a valuable component of submissions, illustrating a commitment to patient centricity and potentially improving the assessment of a trial's overall quality and integrity

Findings
Clinical trial protocols designed without patient input often result in a high participant burden and a poor patient experience, leading to challenges in trial enrollment, adherence, and retention.
A lack of early patient engagement can lead to study designs that are not feasible, collect data on outcomes that aren't meaningful to patients, and require costly protocol amendments later in the process.
Many sponsors and research teams lack a structured, systematic process and standardized tools for effectively planning and executing patient engagement activities.
Meaningful patient partnerships can lead to research of greater quality and relevance, as patients provide unique insights into living with their condition and the practicality of trial procedures.

Recommendations
Adopt a structured toolkit and systematic process to plan patient engagement, define objectives, select appropriate methods, and apply learnings to the protocol.
Engage with patients and caregivers as early as possible in the protocol development lifecycle to ensure their insights can meaningfully influence the study design.
Carefully select diverse patient partners based on criteria like their disease experience, and choose appropriate engagement methods (e.g., advisory boards, focus groups, surveys) to meet defined goals.
Use provided guides, templates, and visual aids to facilitate clear communication, manage expectations, and effectively gather, assess, and implement patient feedback.

Regulatory Considerations
Patient engagement in trial design is strongly encouraged by global regulatory bodies, including the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
These activities align with regulatory initiatives like the FDA's Patient-Focused Drug Development (PFDD) guidance, which emphasizes collecting data that reflects patient experiences, needs, and priorities.
Incorporating patient feedback helps ensure that a clinical trial is designed to capture meaningful endpoints and outcomes, which supports subsequent regulatory and Health Technology Assessment (HTA) review.

Findings
Adherence: Participants achieved an overall adherence rate of 90.18%, demonstrating the feasibility of home-based data collection over a 30-day period.
Participant Feedback: Most participants found the technology easy to use, though some reported difficulties with specific devices, such as sleeping with a wearable watch.
Device Selection: Precision, consistency, and participant preferences guided the selection of spirometry devices, with single-blow spirometry favored for ease of use.
Accuracy: Home spirometry measurements underestimated forced vital capacity (FVC) compared to historical in-clinic data, possibly due to device differences or disease progression.
Future Participation: Nine out of ten participants expressed interest in joining longer virtual studies using similar technologies.

Recommendations
Evaluate Adherence and Usability: Conduct feasibility studies to assess adherence rates and identify usability challenges before full-scale implementation.
Incorporate Participant Feedback: Use cross-over designs to gather participant preferences and feedback on device usability, data sharing, and frequency of data collection.
Validate Accuracy and Consistency: Ensure that DHTs provide precise, reliable measurements comparable to in-clinic standards and assess their performance in real-world settings.
Optimize Technology for Long-Term Use: Address issues such as wearability and participant burden to improve device acceptance and compliance.
Refine Training and Communication: Provide clear instructions and training to participants, setting expectations for using and troubleshooting the technologies.

Regulatory Considerations
Validate Home-Based Data Collection: Demonstrate that data collected remotely with DHTs are accurate, reliable, and clinically relevant for trial endpoints.
Pilot Studies for Regulatory Submissions: Use feasibility data to strengthen regulatory submissions, ensuring endpoints are validated for use in pivotal trials.
Address Technology Limitations: Acknowledge and mitigate potential discrepancies between home and clinic data, using feasibility study insights to refine protocols.

Findings
Many researchers, patients, and other stakeholders lack clarity about when and how to engage as partners within the clinical research process . There is a clear need for guidance on creating meaningful stakeholder partnerships in patient-centered clinical comparative effectiveness research . Engaging patients, caregivers, and other health care stakeholders as partners in planning, conducting, and disseminating research is a promising way to improve clinical decision making and outcomes .

Recommendations
The PCORI Engagement Rubric provides a framework for operationalizing engagement to incorporate patients and other stakeholders in all phases of research . The Rubric includes principles of engagement, definitions of stakeholder types, key considerations for planning, conducting, and disseminating engaged research, potential engagement activities, and examples of promising practices from PCORI-funded projects . PCORI encourages applicants, awardees, and others to apply the rubric to shift the research paradigm from one of conducting research on patients as subjects to a pursuit carried out in collaboration with patients and other stakeholders to better reflect the values, preferences, and outcomes that matter to the patient community .

Regulatory Considerations
The paper does not provide specific regulatory considerations. The PCORI Engagement Rubric was designed to illustrate opportunities for engagement to researchers interested in applying for PCORI funding and to patients and other stakeholders interested in greater involvement in research .