Dataset Information

The European Multicentre Bronchiectasis Audit and Research Collaboration (EMBARC): experiences from a successful ERS Clinical Research Collaboration.

ABSTRACT: In contrast to airway diseases like chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or asthma, and rare diseases such as cystic fibrosis, there has been little research and few clinical trials in bronchiectasis. Guidelines are primarily based on expert opinion and treatment is challenging because of the heterogeneous nature of the disease. In an effort to address decades of underinvestment in bronchiectasis research, education and clinical care, the European Multicentre Bronchiectasis Audit and Research Collaboration (EMBARC) was established in 2012 as a collaborative pan-European network to bring together bronchiectasis researchers. The European Respiratory Society officially funded EMBARC in 2013 as a Clinical Research Collaboration, providing support and infrastructure to allow the project to grow. EMBARC has now established an international bronchiectasis registry that is active in more than 30 countries both within and outside Europe. Beyond the registry, the network participates in designing and facilitating clinical trials, has set international research priorities, promotes education and has participated in producing the first international bronchiectasis guidelines. This manuscript article the development, structure and achievements of EMBARC from 2012 to 2017.

Educational aims

To understand the role of Clinical Research Collaborations as the major way in which the European Respiratory Society can stimulate clinical research in different disease areasTo understand some of the key features of successful disease registriesTo review key epidemiological, clinical and translational studies of bronchiectasis contributed by the European Multicentre Bronchiectasis Audit and Research Collaboration (EMBARC) project in the past 5 yearsTo understand the key research priorities identified by EMBARC for the next 5 years.

SUBMITTER: Chalmers JD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5584712 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The European Multicentre Bronchiectasis Audit and Research Collaboration (EMBARC): experiences from a successful ERS Clinical Research Collaboration.

Chalmers James D JD Crichton Megan M Goeminne Pieter C PC Loebinger Michael R MR Haworth Charles C Almagro Marta M Vendrell Montse M De Soyza Anthony A Dhar Raja R Morgan Lucy L Blasi Francesco F Aliberti Stefano S Boyd Jeanette J Polverino Eva E

Breathe (Sheffield, England) 20170901 3

In contrast to airway diseases like chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or asthma, and rare diseases such as cystic fibrosis, there has been little research and few clinical trials in bronchiectasis. Guidelines are primarily based on expert opinion and treatment is challenging because of the heterogeneous nature of the disease. In an effort to address decades of underinvestment in bronchiectasis research, education and clinical care, the European Multicentre Bronchiectasis Audit and Research C ...[more]

PMID: 28894479

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn 2012 and 2013, we conducted a social network survey of a new translational research network (TRN) designed to deliver better care to cancer patients. Results of these two surveys showed that silos of researchers and clinicians existed before the TRN was established but that the network had mediated collaborative relationships. This paper reports on a third social network survey of the TRN and focusses on the structure of the collaborative arrangements among members.MethodsMembers of the TRN were invited to complete an on-line, whole network survey in May 2015. The survey asked respondents to identify personal impacts, outputs and wider outcomes attributable to their TRN membership. The final question asked respondents to select the name of TRN members with whom they had collaborated either formally or informally. For each member nominated, they were asked to say whether they had known this person before joining the TRN.ResultsResponse rate was 70 %. Over 4 years, the TRN has grown in size from 68 to 244 members. Relationships within and across the TRN have become more collaborative and interactive, with 1658 collaborative ties between members and over 40 % of ties with people unknown to participants before they joined the TRN. This points to a well-functioning network which has retained its focus on the original goals of the TRN and has fostered collaboration between researchers, clinicians, managers, consumers and TRN operational staff. This survey shows that the TRN's impact goes beyond outcomes from formal TRN-funded projects. About one third of respondents could list projects not directly funded by the TRN but which are attributed to TRN membership. Examples of practice change brought about through the TRN were given by 77 % of respondents. A substantial risk factor for the future is the high levels of dependency on key or central TRN participants.ConclusionsThe structure of the TRN with its active central actors and brokers has been able to foster collaboration on implementation initiatives that result in practice change. The role of a social professional network in driving this collaboration is shown.

Project description:BackgroundBronchiectasis is a highly heterogeneous chronic airway disease with marked geographic and ethnic variations. Most influential cohort studies to date have been performed in Europe and USA, which serve as the examples for developing a cohort study in China where there is a high burden of bronchiectasis. The Establishment of China Bronchiectasis Registry and Research Collaboration (BE-China) is designed to: (1) describe the clinical characteristics and natural history of bronchiectasis in China and identify the differences of bronchiectasis between the western countries and China; (2) identify the risk factors associated with disease progression in Chinese population; (3) elucidate the phenotype and endotype of bronchiectasis by integrating the genome, microbiome, proteome, and transcriptome with detailed clinical data; (4) facilitate large randomized controlled trials in China.MethodsThe BE-China is an ongoing prospective, longitudinal, multi-center, observational cohort study aiming to recruit a minimum of 10,000 patients, which was initiated in January 2020 in China. Comprehensive data, including medical history, aetiological testing, lung function, microbiological profiles, radiological scores, comorbidities, mental status, and quality of life (QoL), will be collected at baseline. Patients will be followed up annually for up to 10 years to record longitudinal data on outcomes, treatment patterns and QoL. Biospecimens, if possible, will be collected and stored at - 80 °C for further research. Up to October 2021, the BE-China has enrolled 3758 patients, and collected 666 blood samples and 196 sputum samples from 91 medical centers. The study protocol has been approved by the Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital ethics committee, and all collaborating centers have received approvals from their local ethics committee. All patients will be required to provide written informed consent to their participation.ConclusionsFindings of the BE-China will be crucial to reveal the clinical characteristics and natural history of bronchiectasis and facilitate evidence-based clinical practice in China. Trial registration Registration Number in ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03643653.

Project description:IntroductionStakeholder engagement remains scarce in basic brain research. However, it can greatly improve the relevance of investigations and accelerate the translation of study findings to policy. The Lifebrain consortium investigated risk and protective factors influencing brain health using cognition, lifestyle and imaging data from European cohorts. Stakeholder activities of Lifebrain-organized in a separate work package-included organizing stakeholder events, investigating public perceptions of brain health and dissemination. Here, we describe the experiences of researchers and stakeholders regarding stakeholder engagement in the Lifebrain project.MethodsStakeholder engagement in Lifebrain was evaluated through surveys among researchers and stakeholders and stakeholders' feedback at stakeholder events through evaluation forms. Survey data were analysed using a simple content analysis approach, and results from evaluation forms were summarized after reviewing the frequency of responses.ResultsConsortium researchers and stakeholders experienced the engagement activities as meaningful and relevant. Researchers highlighted that it made the research and research processes more visible and contributed to new networks, optimized data collection on brain health perceptions and the production of papers and provided insights into stakeholder views. Stakeholders found research activities conducted in the stakeholder engagement work package to be within their field of interest and research results relevant to their work. Researchers identified barriers to stakeholder engagement, including lack of time, difficulties in identifying relevant stakeholders, and challenges in communicating complex scientific issues in lay language and maintaining relationships with stakeholders over time. Stakeholders identified barriers such as lack of budget, limited resources in their organization, time constraints and insufficient communication between researchers and stakeholders.ConclusionStakeholder engagement in basic brain research can greatly benefit researchers and stakeholders alike. Its success is conditional on dedicated human and financial resources, clear communication, transparent mutual expectations and clear roles and responsibilities.Public contributionPatient organizations, research networks, policymakers and members of the general public were involved in engagement and research activities throughout the project duration.

Project description:ObjectivesThe DACAPO study as a multicentre nationwide observational healthcare research study investigates the influence of quality of care on the quality of life in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. The aim of this study was to investigate the acceptability to the participating research personnels by assessing attitudes, experiences and workload associated with the conduct of the DACAPO study.Design, setting and participantsA prospective anonymous online survey was sent via email account to 169 participants in 65 study centres. The questionnaire included six different domains: (1) training for performing the study; (2) obtaining informed consent; (3) data collection; (4) data entry using the online documentation system; (5) opinion towards the study and (6) personal data. Descriptive data analysis was carried out.ResultsA total of 78 participants took part (46%) in the survey, 75 questionnaires (44%) could be evaluated. 51% were senior medical specialists. 95% considered the time frame of the training as appropriate and the presentation was rated by 93% as good or very good. Time effort for obtaining consent, data collection and entry was considered by 41% as a burden. Support from the coordinating study centre was rated as good or very good by more than 90% of respondents. While the DACAPO study was seen as scientifically relevant by 81%, only 45% considered the study results valuable for improving patient care significantly.ConclusionCollecting feedback on the acceptability of a large multicentre healthcare research study provided important insights. Recruitment and data acquisition was mainly performed by physicians and often regarded as additional time burden in clinical practice. Reducing the amount of data collection and simplifying data entry could facilitate the conduct of healthcare research studies and could improve motivation of researchers in intensive care medicine.Trial registration numberNCT02637011; Pre-results.

Dataset Information

The European Multicentre Bronchiectasis Audit and Research Collaboration (EMBARC): experiences from a successful ERS Clinical Research Collaboration.

Educational aims

Publications

The European Multicentre Bronchiectasis Audit and Research Collaboration (EMBARC): experiences from a successful ERS Clinical Research Collaboration.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets