Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 22, 2025

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
Published on: September 16, 2022
Using Mixed Methods to Evaluate Risk Minimisation Programs in Europe and the USA: An Innovative Blueprint
Meredith Y Smith1,2, Rachel Davis3, Priya Bahri4
1Evidera, Inc., 929 North Front Street, Wilmington, NC, 28401, USA. tantmieux57@gmail.com.
Background:
Significant methodological shortcomings have been documented to date in risk minimisation program evaluations for medicinal products, including overreliance on survey methods alone. Recently updated guidances from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) recommend the use of frameworks and mixed methods designs to improve the rigor of these assessments.
Objective:
The purpose of this paper was to exemplify how a mixed methods approach, guided by an implementation science framework, can be used to design the evaluation of a risk minimisation program.
Methods:
We selected the Practical, Robust, Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM) as the implementation science framework to guide our mixed methods approach. PRISM provides a comprehensive and systematic approach to measuring the key domains relevant to the implementation and outcomes of a risk minimisation program. We mapped the PRISM domains to the evaluation dimensions described in the EMA and FDA guidances. We then specified a mixed methods evaluation design and data collection methods using a fictitious risk minimisation program as a case study for illustrative purposes.
Results:
On the basis of our case study, we developed quantitative and qualitative measures, including specific items for surveys and interviews, for both formative and summative evaluations. For both the formative and summative evaluations, measures focussed on assessing (1) contextual factors that could affect program implementation and impact and (2) outcomes including implementability and acceptability as well as degree of program reach, adoption, implementation, effectiveness and maintenance.
Conclusions:
Mixed methods, guided by a well-established implementation science framework, can be applied to ensure comprehensive formative and summative evaluations that provide fit-for-purpose information that may inform regulatory decision-making.
More Related Videos
13:04Measuring the Subjective Value of Risky and Ambiguous Options using Experimental Economics and Functional MRI Methods
Published on: September 19, 2012
07:31Implementation of a Real-Time Psychosis Risk Detection and Alerting System Based on Electronic Health Records using CogStack
Published on: May 15, 2020
Related Concept Videos
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Hazard Ratio
For example, in a clinical trial...
Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
Hazard Rate
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups
Statistical Methods for Analyzing Epidemiological Data