- ICH GCP
- 미국 임상 시험 레지스트리
- 임상시험 NCT07613580
Assessing Agreement Between Acuvera Capture and Paper-Based Methods for BCVA Data Recording in Ophthalmic Trials (VALiCAPTURE)
An Observational Comparative Study Assessing Agreement Between Acuvera Capture and Paper-Based Methods for Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) Data Recording in Ophthalmic Clinical Trials
연구 개요
상태
정황
상세 설명
Background and Rationale: Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) is the most widely accepted and clinically meaningful functional endpoint in ophthalmic clinical trials. It is routinely used to assess treatment efficacy, disease progression, and visual function across a broad spectrum of ocular diseases, including age-related macular degeneration (AMD), diabetic retinopathy, and inherited retinal diseases. Regulatory authorities such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) recognize BCVA as a primary endpoint in pivotal trials, and therapeutic approvals often hinge on statistically and clinically significant changes in BCVA outcomes (1-3).
Despite this critical role, BCVA data collection in clinical trials remains vulnerable when recorded on traditional paper forms. Common challenges include:
Calculation errors: Manual determination of the total number of letters correctly identified during BCVA testing is prone to human error, particularly when partial lines are read or when examiners must manually apply line-by-line scoring rules. Miscounting or incorrect summation of letter scores can result in inaccurate BCVA values and distort subsequent data analyses. These errors are inherent to paper-based recording processes and highlight the need for standardized, automated systems capable of performing real-time calculations to ensure data accuracy and consistency across study sites (1,2,3).
Transcription Errors: Manual transfer of BCVA scores from testing charts to case report forms can result in numerical misentries and calculation mistakes (4).
Omission and Misrecording: Missed data points, illegible handwriting, or recording the wrong line/letter score can compromise data integrity (5).
Protocol Deviations: Variations in testing procedures (e.g., incorrect testing distance, inappropriate prompting, or examiner bias) are not always detected in real time, introducing variability and bias (6).
Delayed Error Detection: Errors are often identified only retrospectively, during central reading or data monitoring, causing delays in data cleaning, increased trial costs, and, in some cases, regulatory queries (7).
Digital capture solutions such as Acuvera Capture address these limitations by embedding real-time quality control at the point of care. The application incorporates automated error detection, warning systems for protocol deviations, and standardized workflow guidance, ensuring higher data fidelity. By minimizing calculation, transcription and protocol errors, Acuvera Capture has the potential to strengthen data reliability, streamline trial conduct, and increase regulatory confidence in BCVA endpoints.
Given that BCVA is the most critical functional endpoint in ophthalmic clinical trials, even small improvements in accuracy and reproducibility can substantially impact study outcomes, regulatory acceptability, and sponsor credibility. This study will directly compare Acuvera Capture against paper-based recording to validate data agreement and assess error rates, efficiency, and usability, thereby generating essential evidence to support digital transformation of BCVA data collection.
연구 유형
등록 (추정된)
연락처 및 위치
연구 연락처
- 이름: Tânia Mesquita, BSc
- 전화번호: +351 239484348
- 이메일: emc.trials@oftalmologia.co.pt
연구 연락처 백업
- 이름: Ana Claudia Rocha, BSc
- 이메일: abr@ess.ipp.pt
연구 장소
-
-
-
Coimbra, 포르투갈, 3030-015
- 모병
- Espaco Medico de Coimbra
-
연락하다:
- Tânia Mesquita, BSc
- 전화번호: +351 239484348
- 이메일: emc.trials@oftalmologia.co.pt
-
수석 연구원:
- Rufino Silva, PhD
-
Porto, 포르투갈, 4200-072
- 모병
- TBIO - Escola Superior de Saúde do Politécnico do Porto
-
연락하다:
- Ana Claudia Rocha, BSc
- 전화번호: +351 22 206 1000
- 이메일: abr@ess.ipp.pt
-
수석 연구원:
- Catarina Mateus, PhD
-
-
참여기준
자격 기준
공부할 수 있는 나이
- 성인
- 고령자
건강한 자원 봉사자를 받아들입니다
샘플링 방법
연구 인구
설명
90 adult participants (≈180 eyes) with the following BCVA levels, will be included:
- 30 participants (33%) in the normal/near-normal BCVA range (≤0.3 logMAR ≥70 letters); ≈20/40 or better);
- 30 participants (33%) with mid-range BCVA (0.4-0.9 logMAR (36-69 letters); 20/50 to 20/200)
- 30 participants (33%) with low vision BCVA (≥ 1.0 logMAR (≤35 letters); worse than 20/200) including off-chart acuities using protocol low-vision procedures).
Inclusion Criteria:
- Adults ≥18 years old
- Able and willing to provide written informed consent
- Capable of performing BCVA testing procedures according to study requirements
- All BCVA ranges are eligible, including off-chart acuities (e.g., count fingers, hand motion, light perception) irrespective of the presence or absence of ocular disease.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Any condition preventing reliable completion of BCVA testing (e.g., severe cognitive impairment, language barriers)
- Inability or unwillingness to comply with study requirements
- Non-ophthalmic condition that precludes safe or reliable testing (e.g., immediate post-operative systemic status preventing cooperation).
- Any circumstance that, in the investigator's opinion, makes the eye/participant unsuitable for accurate BCVA testing or for completing both data-capture methods during the same visit.
Number of Sites: 2 ophthalmic clinical research centers Portugal)
Number of Countries: Portugal
Number of Visits: One study visit per participant
Duration: 2 months
Participants will undergo BCVA testing at a single visit using both paper-based recording and electronic capture with Acuvera Capture. Testing order will be randomized to minimize bias. Paper data will be inserted by the examiners or study coordinator into the study eCRF. Electronic capture data will be exported directly from the app.
공부 계획
연구는 어떻게 설계됩니까?
디자인 세부사항
코호트 및 개입
그룹/코호트 |
|---|
|
Normal/Near Normal BCVA Range
30 participants (33%) in the normal/near-normal BCVA range (≤0.3 logMAR ≥70 letters); ≈20/40 or better);
|
|
Mid-range BCVA
30 participants (33%) with mid-range BCVA (0.4-0.9 logMAR (36-69 letters); 20/50 to 20/200)
|
|
Low Vision BCVA
30 participants (33%) with low vision BCVA (≥ 1.0 logMAR (≤35 letters); worse than 20/200) including off-chart acuities using protocol low-vision procedures).
|
연구는 무엇을 측정합니까?
주요 결과 측정
결과 측정 |
측정값 설명 |
기간 |
|---|---|---|
|
Level of agreement in BCVA data recording between Acuvera Capture and paper-based methods
기간: Difference of BCVA score results between paper and Acuvera Capture, in the same single visit - Baseline. (Same visit; assessments performed sequentially within minutes).
|
Level of agreement in BCVA data recording between Acuvera Capture and paper-based methods, expressed using the statistical measurement of concordance, intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]
|
Difference of BCVA score results between paper and Acuvera Capture, in the same single visit - Baseline. (Same visit; assessments performed sequentially within minutes).
|
2차 결과 측정
결과 측정 |
측정값 설명 |
기간 |
|---|---|---|
|
Data discrepancies and errors
기간: Baseline (Same visit; assessments performed sequentially within minutes).
|
Frequency and types of discrepancies between paper and electronic capture (e.g., calculation or transcription errors, missing data, protocol deviations). Error rates stratified by category (e.g., digit transposition, incomplete fields, illegible entries). |
Baseline (Same visit; assessments performed sequentially within minutes).
|
|
Efficiency metrics
기간: Baseline (Same visit; assessments performed sequentially within minutes).
|
Time to complete BCVA data entry (per assessment and per session). Time to query resolution (if applicable). Overall workflow efficiency (average time saved per visit). |
Baseline (Same visit; assessments performed sequentially within minutes).
|
|
User feedback
기간: Baseline (Same visit; assessments performed sequentially within minutes).
|
A survey (Acuvera Capture Experience Survey) is going to be sent to the examiners, that will answer 7 questions about the experience of using Acuvera Capture. The Survey uses a scale of 1-5 (one being the worst and 5 being the best). Usability ratings from certified examiners (measured through structured questionnaires or Likert scales) Questions 1 to 3 of the Acuvera Capture Survey. Qualitative feedback on workflow integration, ease of use, and error prevention features. Question 3 and 4 of the Acuvera Capture Survey. Examiner preference between electronic vs. paper methods. - Questions 5 to 7 of the Acuvera Capture Survey. |
Baseline (Same visit; assessments performed sequentially within minutes).
|
공동 작업자 및 조사자
스폰서
수사관
- 연구 책임자: Ana Rita Santos, PhD, OptymEdge, LLC
간행물 및 유용한 링크
일반 간행물
- Cole ED, Ferrara D, Novais EA, Louzada RN, Waheed NK. CLINICAL TRIAL ENDPOINTS FOR OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY ANGIOGRAPHY IN NEOVASCULAR AGE-RELATED MACULAR DEGENERATION. Retina. 2016 Dec;36 Suppl 1:S83-S92. doi: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000001338.
- Rosser DA, Laidlaw DA, Murdoch IE. The development of a "reduced logMAR" visual acuity chart for use in routine clinical practice. Br J Ophthalmol. 2001 Apr;85(4):432-6. doi: 10.1136/bjo.85.4.432.
- Schulz C, et al. Sources of variability in visual acuity measurement and implications for clinical trials. Br J Ophthalmol. 2016;100(1):62-68.
- Ehlers JP, et al. Errors in visual acuity data recording in ophthalmic clinical trials: impact and mitigation strategies. Ophthalmology. 2020;127(6):747-754.
- Kaiser PK. Prospective evaluation of visual acuity assessment: a comparison of snellen versus ETDRS charts in clinical practice (An AOS Thesis). Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 2009 Dec;107:311-24.
- Csaky KG, Richman EA, Ferris FL 3rd. Report from the NEI/FDA Ophthalmic Clinical Trial Design and Endpoints Symposium. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008 Feb;49(2):479-89. doi: 10.1167/iovs.07-1132. No abstract available.
- European Medicines Agency (EMA). Guideline on Clinical Investigation of Medicinal Products in the Treatment of Chronic Primary Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension. EMA/CHMP; 2012.
- U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Guidance for Industry: Ophthalmic Drug Products - Clinical Pharmacology Considerations. Silver Spring, MD: FDA; 2015.
- Beck RW, Moke PS, Turpin AH, Ferris FL 3rd, SanGiovanni JP, Johnson CA, Birch EE, Chandler DL, Cox TA, Blair RC, Kraker RT. A computerized method of visual acuity testing: adaptation of the early treatment of diabetic retinopathy study testing protocol. Am J Ophthalmol. 2003 Feb;135(2):194-205. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9394(02)01825-1.
연구 기록 날짜
연구 주요 날짜
연구 시작 (실제)
기본 완료 (추정된)
연구 완료 (추정된)
연구 등록 날짜
최초 제출
QC 기준을 충족하는 최초 제출
처음 게시됨 (실제)
연구 기록 업데이트
마지막 업데이트 게시됨 (실제)
QC 기준을 충족하는 마지막 업데이트 제출
마지막으로 확인됨
추가 정보
이 연구와 관련된 용어
개별 참가자 데이터(IPD) 계획
개별 참가자 데이터(IPD)를 공유할 계획입니까?
약물 및 장치 정보, 연구 문서
미국 FDA 규제 의약품 연구
미국 FDA 규제 기기 제품 연구
이 정보는 변경 없이 clinicaltrials.gov 웹사이트에서 직접 가져온 것입니다. 귀하의 연구 세부 정보를 변경, 제거 또는 업데이트하도록 요청하는 경우 register@clinicaltrials.gov. 문의하십시오. 변경 사항이 clinicaltrials.gov에 구현되는 즉시 저희 웹사이트에도 자동으로 업데이트됩니다. .