Internet Data CollectionNCT01740674
Does Internet Data Collection Improve Cohort Retention?
A study testing Electronic data collection in people with Internet Data Collection, run by University of Calgary at 1 site in Canada.
Trial summary
One of the biggest challenges of conducting research where the investigators follow people over a long period of time is keeping the participants involved. One of way that investigators may be able to improve participant involvement in research is to give participants the opportunity to complete their questionnaires… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 16 years and older, women onlyHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Internet Data Collection
- What is being tested?
- Electronic data collection
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 301 participants
- Where
- 1 siteCanada
- Study dates
- Dec 2012to Nov 2014
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 16 years and older
- Women only
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- current participant in the Alberta Pregnancy Outcomes and Nutrition Study
- woman must have an infant less than 1 year of age
Who cannot join
- women who have formally withdrawn from the Alberta Pregnancy Outcomes and Nutrition Study
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Is Internet Data Collection Superior to Traditional Methods in Retaining Participants in Longitudinal Research?
One of the biggest challenges of conducting research where the investigators follow people over a long period of time is keeping the participants involved. One of way that investigators may be able to improve participant involvement in research is to give participants the opportunity to complete their questionnaires online.
Here's how the investigators think the Internet data collection system will help to keep participants involved and ultimately help to answer important questions about the effects of nutrition during pregnancy:
Read more
- It will allow investigators to present complicated questionnaires in a way that doesn't confuse participants. For example, instead of telling participants to skip the remainder of a question if they answered no to the first part of the question, the ePRO system does the skipping for them. The result is less confusion, fewer questions to read, and less of the participant's time.
- It provides a convenient way for participants to keep track of where to find the questionnaire, and how much they have already completed. Participants sometimes don't have time to answer all of the investigator's questions in one sitting. The ePRO system keeps track of how much participants have already done and it's ready to keep going whenever the participant has time. It also avoids the common problem of losing the questionnaires to the household paperwork pile, or worse to the recycling bin.
- It provides timely reminders to participants. Study participants, and especially new moms, are busy and they forget to complete the questionnaires. The ePRO system can provide timely reminders encouraging participants to respond.
- It helps participants complete the questionnaires accurately. The ePRO system has an automatic error detection ability that will alert participants to any questions they missed or completed incorrectly.
Finding ways to keep participants involved in research is something that all researchers are concerned about, and ultimately it's a concern for all Canadians because the results of research are often used to make decisions about health care and the kinds of programs that governments provide. Losing any participant from the study reduces the ability of policy makers to take the best decisions and choices about what health services to fund with limited dollars. What the investigators propose is a study to determine whether Internet data entry really will keep participants involved in a longitudinal study. Previous studies have shown that the internet can be a useful tool for getting people to sign up for research and at least one small study showed that using Internet data entry can actually save money. But no researchers have actually tested whether it really does a better job than paper based questionnaires in terms of keeping participants involved.
In order to answer this question, the investigators will randomly assign the current Alberta Pregnancy Outcomes and Nutrition study participants to either continue receiving the paper-based questionnaire or to start receiving the web-based surveys. The investigators will follow participants over three assessment occasions (over a period of 18 months) and observe any differences between the groups in their involvement. Because the investigators are randomly assigning participants to the two groups, differences in involvement will tell them about usefulness of Internet data entry as a participant retention tool.
Read the detailed description
RESEARCH QUESTIONS: In longitudinal research, will participant-initiated internet data entry improve 1) participant retention and 2) data quality? RESEARCH CONTEXT: While longitudinal research may be the best tool for examining the course of human health and illness over the lifespan, the burden of participation over many years often results in loss of participants to follow-up. Such attrition reduces statistical power and threatens the internal validity and generalizability of inferences drawn from longitudinal data (Shadish et al., 2002). Because internet data collection is convenient and simplifies complex questionnaires, this method may reduce participant burden and reduce attrition. While internet data collection is already regarded as a viable tool for participant recruitment (Smith et al., 2007) and usually results in data of equivalent or better quality (e.g., factor loadings, reliabilities) than traditional paper-and-pencil methods (Vergnaud et al., 2011), internet data collection as a tool to increase participant retention within an existing longitudinal cohort has not been evaluated previously. The goal of the current project is to determine whether internet data collection increases participant retention and data quality within the APrON (Alberta Pregnancy Outcomes and Nutrition) study.
APrON is an ongoing longitudinal cohort study conducted in Calgary and Edmonton, involving more than 2000 women, 1200 of their partners, and their 2000 children. It is designed to answer questions about the impact of maternal nutrient intake and status during pregnancy on: a) maternal mental health, b) birth outcomes, and c) child health and development. The data collected from Albertans participating in health research (such as APrON) is a provincial treasure, an investment that needs to be maximized with easy, modern technology to reduce participant burden and promote better long-term follow-up. Although software is available for single questionnaire data entry (e.g., RedCap), the innovative technology the investigators plan to introduce and evaluate is a made-in-Alberta solution that automates and simplifies the collection of complex short- and long-term longitudinal data - a process that other software cannot easily achieve. This technology holds strong potential for broad application to all longitudinal health research.
Currently, APrON collects data using traditional paper questionnaires mailed out at regular intervals throughout pregnancy and as children develop over the first 3 years. At some time points, participants are also asked to attend a clinic where biological samples and physical measures are taken. The questionnaires are long and complex (whether a question needs to be answered is dependent upon responses to previous questions) and have been identified as a major time burden by study participants. In a recent survey of 1763 APrON participants, almost 65%, indicated they would prefer to complete study questionnaires via the internet - most of the remainder had no preference. Completion rate for paper questionnaires is approximately 85% when participants come to a study clinic for an in-person visit. However, when a clinic visit does not accompany the mailed questionnaires (questionnaires are completed at home and returned by postage paid envelope) response rates are ~ 65%.
RESEARCH PLAN/METHODOLOGY: Electronic Patient Reported Outcomes (ePRO) is a web-based software tool developed by the Women \& Children's Health Research Institute (WCHRI) at the University of Alberta. Pilot studies have been performed at the University of Alberta, however, this study will be the first use of ePRO in a study population of this size. Questionnaires are built using Checkbox Survey Server. Automatic email invitations to participants are based on the individualized anchor dates and schedules (e.g., the questionnaire for children aged 12 months is linked to the individual child's date of birth). Participants receive links and instructions when a survey is due for completion. Reminders are automatically sent if a questionnaire is not completed within appropriate timelines (e.g., after 2 weeks). Study staff can track late and incomplete questionnaires, re-send invitations, and manually enter data when information is obtained via a paper questionnaire or telephone interview. Importantly, the system facilitates linking of data from different questionnaires and different time points.
The investigators propose a randomized trial of data collection methods. Participants will be allocated using a permuted block randomization of equal block sizes from APrON participants in Calgary to one of two groups: (1) continue with paper-based data collection; and (2) use ePRO for future data collection tasks.
IMPACT/RELEVANCE: In 2008, Alberta invested significant research funds to establish pregnancy and birth cohorts that will help develop knowledge needed to improve the health of mothers and infants. Answering health questions about developmental effects requires continued contact and follow-up with the participants every 3-6 months, which is a significant challenge, and one which most international cohorts are struggling to accomplish with paper questionnaires. What the investigators propose in this grant is to evaluate a novel approach to complex longitudinal research that enables data collection that is convenient, less burdensome, and efficient for participants. The investigators expect that the ePRO system will: 1) increase completion rate by tracking participant progress in the study, notifying them when it is time for another round of questionnaires, administering questionnaires in an efficient manner (skip non-relevant questions), and sending reminders about incomplete questionnaires, and 2) improve data quality by alerting participants to missing items.
- Conditions
- Internet Data Collection
- Being tested
- Electronic data collection
- Keywords
- internet data collection, longitudinal research, cohort retention
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Electronic data collectionOther
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Electronic data collection | Experimental | The group of participants who will complete questionnaires via the internet Receives: Other: Electronic data collection |
| Paper data collection | No intervention | The group of participants who will continue to complete paper based questionnaires, as has been the practice for this longitudinal study. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Participant retention 6 months postpartum
participant retention is defined as the number of participants providing data at 6 months postpartum.
Measured: postpartum 6 months
Participant retention 12 months postpartum
participant retention is defined as the number of participants providing data at 12 months postpartum.
Measured: 12 months postpartum
Secondary outcomes (2)
Completeness of collected data 6 months postpartum
completeness of collected data is defined as the percent of completed items of all items included in the questionnaire package at 6 months postpartum.
Measured: postpartum 6 months
Completeness of collected data 12 months postpartum
completeness of collected data is defined as the percent of completed items of all items included in the questionnaire package at 12 months postpartum.
Measured: postpartum 12 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted4 Dec 2012 (estimated)
- Study startDec 2012
- Primary completionNov 2014
- Study completionNov 2014
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (5)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Internet Data CollectionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of CalgaryThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 301 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Calgary
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- M.S.I. Foundation
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Gerry Giesbrecht, University of Calgary
- Investigators
- Gerry Giesbrecht, PhD, Principal investigator, University of Calgary
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01740674
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- MSI-865
- Status last verified
- Dec 2014
- First submitted
- 20 Nov 2012
- Last updated
- 8 Dec 2014
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Davis LL, Broome ME, Cox RP. Maximizing retention in community-based clinical trials. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2002;34(1):47-53. doi: 10.1111/j.1547-5069.2002.00047.x.
PubMed 11901967Vergnaud AC, Touvier M, Mejean C, Kesse-Guyot E, Pollet C, Malon A, Castetbon K, Hercberg S. Agreement between web-based and paper versions of a socio-demographic questionnaire in the NutriNet-Sante study. Int J Public Health. 2011 Aug;56(4):407-17. doi: 10.1007/s00038-011-0257-5. Epub 2011 May 3.
PubMed 21538094Smith B, Smith TC, Gray GC, Ryan MA; Millennium Cohort Study Team. When epidemiology meets the Internet: Web-based surveys in the Millennium Cohort Study. Am J Epidemiol. 2007 Dec 1;166(11):1345-54. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwm212. Epub 2007 Aug 28.
PubMed 17728269Welker JA. Implementation of electronic data capture systems: barriers and solutions. Contemp Clin Trials. 2007 May;28(3):329-36. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2007.01.001. Epub 2007 Jan 11.
PubMed 17287151Birnbaum MH. Human research and data collection via the internet. Annu Rev Psychol. 2004;55:803-32. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.141601.
PubMed 14744235
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 8 Dec 2014. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Is Internet Data Collection Superior to Traditional Methods in Retaining Participants in Longitudinal Research?
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01740674
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- MSI-865
- Conditions
- Internet Data Collection
- Keywords
- internet data collection, longitudinal research, cohort retention
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 301 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of CalgaryUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- M.S.I. Foundation
- Study start
- Dec 2012
- Primary completion
- Nov 2014 (actual)
- Study completion
- Nov 2014 (actual)
- First posted
- 4 Dec 2012 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
One of the biggest challenges of conducting research where the investigators follow people over a long period of time is keeping the participants involved. One of way that investigators may be able to improve participant involvement in research is to give participants the opportunity to complete their questionnaires online.
Here's how the investigators think the Internet data collection system will help to keep participants involved and ultimately help to answer important questions about the effects of nutrition during pregnancy:
- It will allow investigators to present complicated questionnaires in a way that doesn't confuse participants. For example, instead of telling participants to skip the remainder of a question if they answered no to the first part of the question, the ePRO system does the skipping for them. The result is less confusion, fewer questions to read, and less of the participant's time.
- It provides a convenient way for participants to keep track of where to find the questionnaire, and how much they have already completed. Participants sometimes don't have time to answer all of the investigator's questions in one sitting. The ePRO system keeps track of how much participants have already done and it's ready to keep going whenever the participant has time. It also avoids the common problem of losing the questionnaires to the household paperwork pile, or worse to the recycling bin.
- It provides timely reminders to participants. Study participants, and especially new moms, are busy and they forget to complete the questionnaires. The ePRO system can provide timely reminders encouraging participants to respond.
- It helps participants complete the questionnaires accurately. The ePRO system has an automatic error detection ability that will alert participants to any questions they missed or completed incorrectly.
Finding ways to keep participants involved in research is something that all researchers are concerned about, and ultimately it's a concern for all Canadians because the results of research are often used to make decisions about health care and the kinds of programs that governments provide. Losing any participant from the study reduces the ability of policy makers to take the best decisions and choices about what health services to fund with limited dollars. What the investigators propose is a study to determine whether Internet data entry really will keep participants involved in a longitudinal study. Previous studies have shown that the internet can be a useful tool for getting people to sign up for research and at least one small study showed that using Internet data entry can actually save money. But no researchers have actually tested whether it really does a better job than paper based questionnaires in terms of keeping participants involved.
In order to answer this question, the investigators will randomly assign the current Alberta Pregnancy Outcomes and Nutrition study participants to either continue receiving the paper-based questionnaire or to start receiving the web-based surveys. The investigators will follow participants over three assessment occasions (over a period of 18 months) and observe any differences between the groups in their involvement. Because the investigators are randomly assigning participants to the two groups, differences in involvement will tell them about usefulness of Internet data entry as a participant retention tool.
Detailed description
RESEARCH QUESTIONS: In longitudinal research, will participant-initiated internet data entry improve 1) participant retention and 2) data quality? RESEARCH CONTEXT: While longitudinal research may be the best tool for examining the course of human health and illness over the lifespan, the burden of participation over many years often results in loss of participants to follow-up. Such attrition reduces statistical power and threatens the internal validity and generalizability of inferences drawn from longitudinal data (Shadish et al., 2002). Because internet data collection is convenient and simplifies complex questionnaires, this method may reduce participant burden and reduce attrition. While internet data collection is already regarded as a viable tool for participant recruitment (Smith et al., 2007) and usually results in data of equivalent or better quality (e.g., factor loadings, reliabilities) than traditional paper-and-pencil methods (Vergnaud et al., 2011), internet data collection as a tool to increase participant retention within an existing longitudinal cohort has not been evaluated previously. The goal of the current project is to determine whether internet data collection increases participant retention and data quality within the APrON (Alberta Pregnancy Outcomes and Nutrition) study.
APrON is an ongoing longitudinal cohort study conducted in Calgary and Edmonton, involving more than 2000 women, 1200 of their partners, and their 2000 children. It is designed to answer questions about the impact of maternal nutrient intake and status during pregnancy on: a) maternal mental health, b) birth outcomes, and c) child health and development. The data collected from Albertans participating in health research (such as APrON) is a provincial treasure, an investment that needs to be maximized with easy, modern technology to reduce participant burden and promote better long-term follow-up. Although software is available for single questionnaire data entry (e.g., RedCap), the innovative technology the investigators plan to introduce and evaluate is a made-in-Alberta solution that automates and simplifies the collection of complex short- and long-term longitudinal data - a process that other software cannot easily achieve. This technology holds strong potential for broad application to all longitudinal health research.
Currently, APrON collects data using traditional paper questionnaires mailed out at regular intervals throughout pregnancy and as children develop over the first 3 years. At some time points, participants are also asked to attend a clinic where biological samples and physical measures are taken. The questionnaires are long and complex (whether a question needs to be answered is dependent upon responses to previous questions) and have been identified as a major time burden by study participants. In a recent survey of 1763 APrON participants, almost 65%, indicated they would prefer to complete study questionnaires via the internet - most of the remainder had no preference. Completion rate for paper questionnaires is approximately 85% when participants come to a study clinic for an in-person visit. However, when a clinic visit does not accompany the mailed questionnaires (questionnaires are completed at home and returned by postage paid envelope) response rates are ~ 65%.
RESEARCH PLAN/METHODOLOGY: Electronic Patient Reported Outcomes (ePRO) is a web-based software tool developed by the Women \& Children's Health Research Institute (WCHRI) at the University of Alberta. Pilot studies have been performed at the University of Alberta, however, this study will be the first use of ePRO in a study population of this size. Questionnaires are built using Checkbox Survey Server. Automatic email invitations to participants are based on the individualized anchor dates and schedules (e.g., the questionnaire for children aged 12 months is linked to the individual child's date of birth). Participants receive links and instructions when a survey is due for completion. Reminders are automatically sent if a questionnaire is not completed within appropriate timelines (e.g., after 2 weeks). Study staff can track late and incomplete questionnaires, re-send invitations, and manually enter data when information is obtained via a paper questionnaire or telephone interview. Importantly, the system facilitates linking of data from different questionnaires and different time points.
The investigators propose a randomized trial of data collection methods. Participants will be allocated using a permuted block randomization of equal block sizes from APrON participants in Calgary to one of two groups: (1) continue with paper-based data collection; and (2) use ePRO for future data collection tasks.
IMPACT/RELEVANCE: In 2008, Alberta invested significant research funds to establish pregnancy and birth cohorts that will help develop knowledge needed to improve the health of mothers and infants. Answering health questions about developmental effects requires continued contact and follow-up with the participants every 3-6 months, which is a significant challenge, and one which most international cohorts are struggling to accomplish with paper questionnaires. What the investigators propose in this grant is to evaluate a novel approach to complex longitudinal research that enables data collection that is convenient, less burdensome, and efficient for participants. The investigators expect that the ePRO system will: 1) increase completion rate by tracking participant progress in the study, notifying them when it is time for another round of questionnaires, administering questionnaires in an efficient manner (skip non-relevant questions), and sending reminders about incomplete questionnaires, and 2) improve data quality by alerting participants to missing items.
Study design
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Electronic data collection | Experimental | Other: Electronic data collectionThe group of participants who will complete questionnaires via the internet |
| Paper data collection | No intervention | –The group of participants who will continue to complete paper based questionnaires, as has been the practice for this longitudinal study. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 16 years and older
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- current participant in the Alberta Pregnancy Outcomes and Nutrition Study
- woman must have an infant less than 1 year of age
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- women who have formally withdrawn from the Alberta Pregnancy Outcomes and Nutrition Study
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Electronic data collection | Other | Electronic data collection |
Primary outcome
Participant retention 6 months postpartum
Time frame: postpartum 6 months
participant retention is defined as the number of participants providing data at 6 months postpartum.
Participant retention 12 months postpartum
Time frame: 12 months postpartum
participant retention is defined as the number of participants providing data at 12 months postpartum.
2 secondary outcomes
Completeness of collected data 6 months postpartum
Time frame: postpartum 6 months
Completeness of collected data 12 months postpartum
Time frame: postpartum 12 months
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 8 Dec 2014.
- Background: PubMed 11901967Davis LL, Broome ME, Cox RP. Maximizing retention in community-based clinical trials. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2002;34(1):47-53. doi: 10.1111/j.1547-5069.2002.00047.x.
- Background: PubMed 21538094Vergnaud AC, Touvier M, Mejean C, Kesse-Guyot E, Pollet C, Malon A, Castetbon K, Hercberg S. Agreement between web-based and paper versions of a socio-demographic questionnaire in the NutriNet-Sante study. Int J Public Health. 2011 Aug;56(4):407-17. doi: 10.1007/s00038-011-0257-5. Epub 2011 May 3.
- Background: PubMed 17728269Smith B, Smith TC, Gray GC, Ryan MA; Millennium Cohort Study Team. When epidemiology meets the Internet: Web-based surveys in the Millennium Cohort Study. Am J Epidemiol. 2007 Dec 1;166(11):1345-54. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwm212. Epub 2007 Aug 28.
- Background: PubMed 17287151Welker JA. Implementation of electronic data capture systems: barriers and solutions. Contemp Clin Trials. 2007 May;28(3):329-36. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2007.01.001. Epub 2007 Jan 11.
- Background: PubMed 14744235Birnbaum MH. Human research and data collection via the internet. Annu Rev Psychol. 2004;55:803-32. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.141601.
Related trials for Internet Data Collection
RecruitingObservational study
Microvention AnEurysm & STroke Real-life Data cOllection
Intracranial Aneurysm, Intracranial Aneurysm, Wide Neck Aneurysm, Large Neck Aneurysm Lesion
RecruitingObservational study
Research Accelerated by You Lupus Registry
Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE), Lupus Nephritis (LN)
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Gerry Giesbrecht, PhD principal investigator
University of Calgary
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Electronic data collection in people with Internet Data Collection, run by University of Calgary at 1 site in Canada.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 8 Dec 2014. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Canada. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Participant retention 6 months postpartum (time frame: postpartum 6 months). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01740674, which also lists 5 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 8 Dec 2014.