Autism Spectrum DisorderNCT04654117
Examining the Active Ingredients of Consultation of a Parent-mediated Intervention for Autism
A study testing Consultee-centered administrative consultation in people with Autism Spectrum Disorder, run by Michigan State University at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Parent-mediated interventions are considered best practice for treating children with autism spectrum disorder, but these interventions are underutilized in community settings. Implementation strategies like consultation can improve the implementation of these interventions, but little is known about the active… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Autism Spectrum Disorder
- What is being tested?
- Consultee-centered administrative consultation
- Type of treatment
- Pill or oral medicine
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 41 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 1 Oct 2021to 30 Mar 2023
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
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 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Have at least one caregiver on their caseload who would be appropriate for Project ImPACT and who agrees to enroll in the study and have their sessions recorded.
- Parent or guardian of a child who has a community diagnosis of ASD established using the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (a gold standard ASD assessment), receives services through the Medicaid Autism Benefit (requires a household income at or below 133% of the federal poverty line), is between the ages of 18 months and 6 years, which is the age range targeted for Project ImPACT, and has at least 1 session per week with the provider.
- Child's provider is enrolled in the study.
Who cannot join
- Not qualified to bill for ABA services through the Medicaid Autism Benefit.
- Under age 18
- Under age 18
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Michigan State University
East Lansing, Michigan, 48824
About this study
Official title: Examining the Active Ingredients of Consultation to Improve Implementation of a Parent-mediated Intervention for Children With Autism in the Community Mental Health System
Parent-mediated interventions are considered best practice for treating children with autism spectrum disorder, but these interventions are underutilized in community settings. Implementation strategies like consultation can improve the implementation of these interventions, but little is known about the active ingredients of consultation. This study uses an experimental design (ABCD single-case design with multiple baselines) to identify the active ingredients of a consultation model designed to support the implementation of a parent-mediated intervention for autism spectrum disorder in a low-resourced community mental health system.
Read the detailed description
There are multiple evidence-based practices (EBPs) to treat autism spectrum disorder (ASD), yet the gap from when EBPs are developed to when they reach community settings is 17 years. EBPs are consistently underused in community settings despite their well-studied effectiveness. One such EBP for treating ASD in young children is parent-mediated intervention.
Consultation is one method of supporting implementation that involves providing clinicians with support and feedback from intervention experts. For this study, consultation on an evidence-based parent-mediated intervention, Project ImPACT, will be the focus. Understanding the active ingredients that go into consultation is important to understand how consultation works so that it can be tailored to best meet the needs of community settings. This single-case experimental design (SCED) will manipulate three potential ingredients of consultation: feedback on taped sessions, case support, and skill rehearsal.
Groups of 3-5 providers per agency will be given 2 weeks to complete a 6-hour self-directed online tutorial on Project ImPACT utilized regularly by Project ImPACT consultants. Next, each agency will be randomly assigned to baselines lasting 3-6 weeks, followed by 4 weeks of each consultation component (total of 12 weeks). All agencies will receive consultation. The order of the consultation components will be randomized using a random number generator such that each agency has an equal chance of receiving one of the predetermined permutations of phases which are labeled in alphabetical order (e.g., equally as likely to be randomized to ABCD order as ADBC order). Across each phase, providers will record one session per week with their enrolled family and submit it via a HIPAA-compliant Drop-box link. Providers will complete weekly online questionnaires on implementation outcomes, with time reserved during consultation sessions to complete them. After consultation, providers will submit a final recorded session and questionnaire 8-weeks post-consultation. Caregivers will complete a measure of social communication for their child via online questionnaire at baseline, twice during consultation, and after 8 weeks post-consultation.
The feedback phase will involve the consultant and peers responding to the 5-minute clips of recorded telehealth sessions with praise and constructive feedback. The case support phase will be a time for the consultant and peers to assist in any challenges faced; for example, this could include issues with telehealth, caregiver coaching, or family/child needs. The skill rehearsal phase will allow for consultees to practice their clinical skills via role play.
This study will have 4 aims:
Specific Aim 1: Identify the potential active ingredients of the consultation model by evaluating its effects on providers' treatment adherence and parent-mediated intervention competence. The investigators predict that the feedback component will improve adherence and competence over and above improvements from the case support and skill rehearsal components.
Specific Aim 2: Examine the relative feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of each consultation component using a SCED component analysis. Feasibility is the extent to which a practice can be successfully carried out within a setting. Acceptability is the extent to which a practice is agreeable and satisfactory. Appropriateness is the perceived fit or relevance of a practice to address a problem. The investigators predict that providers will perceive the case support component to be the most feasible, acceptable, and appropriate of all components.
Specific Aim 3: Examine the effects of the consultation model on case penetration and the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of the EBP (Project ImPACT). The investigators predict case penetration (i.e., total number of Project ImPACT cases on a provider's caseload divided by the total number of eligible clients) and EBP feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness to increase over time.
Exploratory Aim 4: Demonstrate associated social communication outcomes for Medicaid-enrolled children with ASD from baseline to post-consultation. Given that consultation leads to improved adherence and child outcomes and Project ImPACT results in improved child social communication outcomes, the investigators predict that our consultation model will be associated with improvements in child social communication skills.
- Conditions
- Autism Spectrum Disorder
- Being tested
- Consultee-centered administrative consultation
- Keywords
- Consultation, Autism Spectrum Disorder, Medicaid, Parent-mediated intervention, Parent Training
- Medical subject headings
- Autism Spectrum Disorder
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Consultee-centered administrative consultationOther
The consultee-centered administrative consultation model expressly focuses on supporting providers to increase EBP implementation within their specific setting.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Baseline | No intervention | Following completing the online tutorial, each agency will have a baseline lasting 3-6 weeks (this will be staggered by agency). |
| Treatment (Consultation) | Experimental | Consultation will be conducted in 4-week phases that correspond to the three consultation components. The phases will occur in a randomized order. During a given phase, no components of any other phases will be provided. Feedback phase. Consultees will submit 5-minute clips of session recordings of their Project ImPACT session with their enrolled family for feedback. Oral feedback will be provided by the consultant and peers. Case support phase. The consultant will lead the group in problem-solving common barriers that providers experience with their cases. Skill rehearsal phase. The consultant will lead skill rehearsal practices in which providers role play elements of a Project ImPACT session. Receives: Other: Consultee-centered administrative consultation |
| Follow Up | No intervention | During the follow-up period, consultation will not occur, and providers will continue implementing Project ImPACT with their cases. Eight weeks post-consultation, providers will submit a recorded Project ImPACT session with their enrolled family. Providers and caregivers will complete a final online questionnaire. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Treatment Adherence
The Project ImPACT Coaching Fidelity Checklist is a measure of treatment adherence. It uses a 3-point scale -- Observed (1), Partially Observed (.5), and Not Observed (0). Higher scores indicate higher treatment adherence. Based on scoring guidelines for this measure, scores for each item are multiplied by an item-specific weight value. Scores for each item are then summed and divided by the total number of items scored, yielding a score ranging from 0 to 100.
Measured: 23-26 weeks
Parent-mediated Intervention Competence
Parent-mediated intervention competence will be assessed via Parent Empowerment and Coaching in Early Intervention (PEACE) coding which utilizes a 5-point scale to assess for competency in delivering collaborative coaching techniques used in parent-mediated interventions. The scale used is: Never (1), Rarely (2), Sometimes (3), Often (4), and Almost Always (5). The minimum value on the scale is 1 and the maximum is 5. Higher scores indicate higher parent-mediated intervention competence.
Measured: 23-26 weeks
Case Penetration
Case penetration will be measured weekly using the Penetrability Formula and will be expressed using provider report of the total number of Project ImPACT cases on their caseload divided by the total number of eligible clients with ASD on their Medicaid Autism Benefit caseload. This is expressed as a percentage. Higher percentage values indicate higher case penetration.
Measured: 23-26 weeks
Ratings of the Usability of Each Consultation Component
Clinicians reported on the usability of each consultation component weekly across the 4 weeks of each consultation condition using the Implementation Strategy Usability Scale (Lyon et al., 2021). This 10-item questionnaire uses a 5-point Likert scale to examine clinician perceptions about the complexity of using an implementation strategy. The scale is unidimensional and has no subscales. Based on scoring guidelines, a formula is used to calculate the total usability score, which ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate higher usability; higher scores indicate higher ratings of the participant's ability to use the strategy with ease. The formula involves the following: for each odd numbered item, subtract 1 from the Likert rating value to get the new value; for each even numbered item, subtract the Likert rating value from 5 to get a new value; then sum all new values and multiply by 2.5.
Measured: 23-26 weeks
Ratings of Perceptions of Project ImPACT
Providers completed the Perceived Characteristics of Intervention Scale (PCIS; Cook et al., 2015) weekly about their perceptions of Project ImPACT. This 18-item questionnaire includes items related to various constructs from Rogers' Diffusions of Innovation theory (Rogers, 2010). All items are rated on a 7-point Likert scale and the overall PCIS score is established by computing the mean of all items. The minimum score is 1.00 and maximum is 7.00. Higher values indicate more positive perceptions of the intervention.
Measured: 23-26 weeks
Child Social Communication Skills
The Autism Impact Measure has 41 items rated on a 5-point scale ranging from Never (1) to Always (5). The overall score is calculated by summing the scores on two scales (frequency and impact). Higher values indicate a higher frequency and impact of autism-related concerns child functioning. The minimum value is 82 and the maximum value is 410.
Measured: 23-26 weeks
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted4 Dec 2020
- Study start1 Oct 2021
- Primary completion14 Oct 2022
- Study completion30 Mar 2023
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Autism Spectrum DisorderStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 41 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Michigan State University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Brooke Ingersoll, Michigan State University
- Investigators
- Brooke Ingersoll, Principal investigator, Michigan State University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04654117
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- R40MC27705
- Status last verified
- Mar 2025
- First submitted
- 29 Nov 2020
- Last updated
- 3 Apr 2025
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Straiton-Webster D, Moeyaert M, Greatorex J, Ewell A, Ingersoll B. Examining the Active Ingredients of Consultation: Effects of Discrete Consultation Components on Implementation Outcomes for an Autism Intervention in a Community Mental Health System. J Autism Dev Disord. 2026 Nov 4. doi: 10.1007/s10803-026-07536-5. Online ahead of print.
PubMed 42980943
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 3 Apr 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Examining the Active Ingredients of Consultation to Improve Implementation of a Parent-mediated Intervention for Children With Autism in the Community Mental Health System
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04654117
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- R40MC27705
- Conditions
- Autism Spectrum Disorder
- Keywords
- Consultation, Autism Spectrum Disorder, Medicaid, Parent-mediated intervention, Parent Training
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 41 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Michigan State UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Oct 2021 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 14 Oct 2022 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Mar 2023 (actual)
- First posted
- 4 Dec 2020 (actual)
- Results
- Posted 3 Apr 2025
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Parent-mediated interventions are considered best practice for treating children with autism spectrum disorder, but these interventions are underutilized in community settings. Implementation strategies like consultation can improve the implementation of these interventions, but little is known about the active ingredients of consultation. This study uses an experimental design (ABCD single-case design with multiple baselines) to identify the active ingredients of a consultation model designed to support the implementation of a parent-mediated intervention for autism spectrum disorder in a low-resourced community mental health system.
Detailed description
There are multiple evidence-based practices (EBPs) to treat autism spectrum disorder (ASD), yet the gap from when EBPs are developed to when they reach community settings is 17 years. EBPs are consistently underused in community settings despite their well-studied effectiveness. One such EBP for treating ASD in young children is parent-mediated intervention.
Consultation is one method of supporting implementation that involves providing clinicians with support and feedback from intervention experts. For this study, consultation on an evidence-based parent-mediated intervention, Project ImPACT, will be the focus. Understanding the active ingredients that go into consultation is important to understand how consultation works so that it can be tailored to best meet the needs of community settings. This single-case experimental design (SCED) will manipulate three potential ingredients of consultation: feedback on taped sessions, case support, and skill rehearsal.
Groups of 3-5 providers per agency will be given 2 weeks to complete a 6-hour self-directed online tutorial on Project ImPACT utilized regularly by Project ImPACT consultants. Next, each agency will be randomly assigned to baselines lasting 3-6 weeks, followed by 4 weeks of each consultation component (total of 12 weeks). All agencies will receive consultation. The order of the consultation components will be randomized using a random number generator such that each agency has an equal chance of receiving one of the predetermined permutations of phases which are labeled in alphabetical order (e.g., equally as likely to be randomized to ABCD order as ADBC order). Across each phase, providers will record one session per week with their enrolled family and submit it via a HIPAA-compliant Drop-box link. Providers will complete weekly online questionnaires on implementation outcomes, with time reserved during consultation sessions to complete them. After consultation, providers will submit a final recorded session and questionnaire 8-weeks post-consultation. Caregivers will complete a measure of social communication for their child via online questionnaire at baseline, twice during consultation, and after 8 weeks post-consultation.
The feedback phase will involve the consultant and peers responding to the 5-minute clips of recorded telehealth sessions with praise and constructive feedback. The case support phase will be a time for the consultant and peers to assist in any challenges faced; for example, this could include issues with telehealth, caregiver coaching, or family/child needs. The skill rehearsal phase will allow for consultees to practice their clinical skills via role play.
This study will have 4 aims:
Specific Aim 1: Identify the potential active ingredients of the consultation model by evaluating its effects on providers' treatment adherence and parent-mediated intervention competence. The investigators predict that the feedback component will improve adherence and competence over and above improvements from the case support and skill rehearsal components.
Specific Aim 2: Examine the relative feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of each consultation component using a SCED component analysis. Feasibility is the extent to which a practice can be successfully carried out within a setting. Acceptability is the extent to which a practice is agreeable and satisfactory. Appropriateness is the perceived fit or relevance of a practice to address a problem. The investigators predict that providers will perceive the case support component to be the most feasible, acceptable, and appropriate of all components.
Specific Aim 3: Examine the effects of the consultation model on case penetration and the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of the EBP (Project ImPACT). The investigators predict case penetration (i.e., total number of Project ImPACT cases on a provider's caseload divided by the total number of eligible clients) and EBP feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness to increase over time.
Exploratory Aim 4: Demonstrate associated social communication outcomes for Medicaid-enrolled children with ASD from baseline to post-consultation. Given that consultation leads to improved adherence and child outcomes and Project ImPACT results in improved child social communication outcomes, the investigators predict that our consultation model will be associated with improvements in child social communication skills.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Baseline | No intervention | –Following completing the online tutorial, each agency will have a baseline lasting 3-6 weeks (this will be staggered by agency). |
| Treatment (Consultation) | Experimental | Other: Consultee-centered administrative consultationConsultation will be conducted in 4-week phases that correspond to the three consultation components. The phases will occur in a randomized order. During a given phase, no components of any other phases will be provided. Feedback phase. Consultees will submit 5-minute clips of session recordings of their Project ImPACT session with their enrolled family for feedback. Oral feedback will be provided by the consultant and peers. Case support phase. The consultant will lead the group in problem-solving common barriers that providers experience with their cases. Skill rehearsal phase. The consultant will lead skill rehearsal practices in which providers role play elements of a Project ImPACT session. |
| Follow Up | No intervention | –During the follow-up period, consultation will not occur, and providers will continue implementing Project ImPACT with their cases. Eight weeks post-consultation, providers will submit a recorded Project ImPACT session with their enrolled family. Providers and caregivers will complete a final online questionnaire. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Have at least one caregiver on their caseload who would be appropriate for Project ImPACT and who agrees to enroll in the study and have their sessions recorded.
- Parent or guardian of a child who has a community diagnosis of ASD established using the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (a gold standard ASD assessment), receives services through the Medicaid Autism Benefit (requires a household income at or below 133% of the federal poverty line), is between the ages of 18 months and 6 years, which is the age range targeted for Project ImPACT, and has at least 1 session per week with the provider.
- Child's provider is enrolled in the study.
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Not qualified to bill for ABA services through the Medicaid Autism Benefit.
- Under age 18
- Under age 18
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Consultee-centered administrative consultationThe consultee-centered administrative consultation model expressly focuses on supporting providers to increase EBP implementation within their specific setting. | Other | Treatment (Consultation) |
Primary outcome
Treatment Adherence
Time frame: 23-26 weeks
The Project ImPACT Coaching Fidelity Checklist is a measure of treatment adherence. It uses a 3-point scale -- Observed (1), Partially Observed (.5), and Not Observed (0). Higher scores indicate higher treatment adherence. Based on scoring guidelines for this measure, scores for each item are multiplied by an item-specific weight value. Scores for each item are then summed and divided by the total number of items scored, yielding a score ranging from 0 to 100.
Parent-mediated Intervention Competence
Time frame: 23-26 weeks
Parent-mediated intervention competence will be assessed via Parent Empowerment and Coaching in Early Intervention (PEACE) coding which utilizes a 5-point scale to assess for competency in delivering collaborative coaching techniques used in parent-mediated interventions. The scale used is: Never (1), Rarely (2), Sometimes (3), Often (4), and Almost Always (5). The minimum value on the scale is 1 and the maximum is 5. Higher scores indicate higher parent-mediated intervention competence.
Case Penetration
Time frame: 23-26 weeks
Case penetration will be measured weekly using the Penetrability Formula and will be expressed using provider report of the total number of Project ImPACT cases on their caseload divided by the total number of eligible clients with ASD on their Medicaid Autism Benefit caseload. This is expressed as a percentage. Higher percentage values indicate higher case penetration.
Ratings of the Usability of Each Consultation Component
Time frame: 23-26 weeks
Clinicians reported on the usability of each consultation component weekly across the 4 weeks of each consultation condition using the Implementation Strategy Usability Scale (Lyon et al., 2021). This 10-item questionnaire uses a 5-point Likert scale to examine clinician perceptions about the complexity of using an implementation strategy. The scale is unidimensional and has no subscales. Based on scoring guidelines, a formula is used to calculate the total usability score, which ranges from 0-100. Higher scores indicate higher usability; higher scores indicate higher ratings of the participant's ability to use the strategy with ease. The formula involves the following: for each odd numbered item, subtract 1 from the Likert rating value to get the new value; for each even numbered item, subtract the Likert rating value from 5 to get a new value; then sum all new values and multiply by 2.5.
Ratings of Perceptions of Project ImPACT
Time frame: 23-26 weeks
Providers completed the Perceived Characteristics of Intervention Scale (PCIS; Cook et al., 2015) weekly about their perceptions of Project ImPACT. This 18-item questionnaire includes items related to various constructs from Rogers' Diffusions of Innovation theory (Rogers, 2010). All items are rated on a 7-point Likert scale and the overall PCIS score is established by computing the mean of all items. The minimum score is 1.00 and maximum is 7.00. Higher values indicate more positive perceptions of the intervention.
Child Social Communication Skills
Time frame: 23-26 weeks
The Autism Impact Measure has 41 items rated on a 5-point scale ranging from Never (1) to Always (5). The overall score is calculated by summing the scores on two scales (frequency and impact). Higher values indicate a higher frequency and impact of autism-related concerns child functioning. The minimum value is 82 and the maximum value is 410.
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 3 Apr 2025.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 42980943Straiton-Webster D, Moeyaert M, Greatorex J, Ewell A, Ingersoll B. Examining the Active Ingredients of Consultation: Effects of Discrete Consultation Components on Implementation Outcomes for an Autism Intervention in a Community Mental Health System. J Autism Dev Disord. 2026 Nov 4. doi: 10.1007/s10803-026-07536-5. Online ahead of print.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Autism Spectrum Disorder
RecruitingPhase 1
Cannabidiol (CBD) in Adults With ASD
Autism Spectrum Disorder
RecruitingPhase 3
A Study to Evaluate the Long-term Safety and Tolerability of Xanomeline and Trospium Chloride for the Treatment of Psychiatric Disorders in Children and Adolescents
Schizophrenia, Autism-Related Irritability
Not yet recruiting
Sensory-integration Therapy Verses Augumented Reality-based Training in ASD
Autism Spectrum Disorder
Recruiting
Cumulative and Booster Effects of Multisession Prefrontal tDCS in ASD Adolescents
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation, Autistic Spectrum Disorder
Not yet recruiting
"Family Resilience And Mind-body Enhancement" (FRAME): A Randomised Controlled Trial
Autism
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.
Brooke Ingersoll principal investigator
Michigan State University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Consultee-centered administrative consultation in people with Autism Spectrum Disorder, run by Michigan State University at 1 site in United States.
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 3 inclusion and 3 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 3 Apr 2025. 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 United States. 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?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 3 Apr 2025). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
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?
Treatment Adherence (time frame: 23-26 weeks). The study lists 6 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 NCT04654117, which also lists 1 linked publication.
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 3 Apr 2025.