Use of Mobile Devices and the Internet to Streamline an Asthma Clinical Trial

Conditions

Asthma

Keywords

Asthma, Clinical Trial Design, Electronic Data Entry, Mobile Devices, Home Spirometry

Brief summary

Asthma is an inflammatory disease that imposes a significant burden affecting an estimated 300 million persons and 20% of all children worldwide. It is one of the most common chronic diseases of childhood and is a leading cause of school absenteeism. There continues to be a great need for clinical trials in asthma but traditional clinical trials are expensive and reasons cited by patients for non-participation are extra inconvenience and logistical barriers. Study designs which are patient centered and reduce trial costs are needed. The long-range goal of this application is to transform the paradigm of clinical research into a more efficient and cost-effective enterprise by capitalizing upon current widely used mobile electronic means of communication and information transfer. This innovative project is a streamlined clinical trial that will run concurrently with a nearly identical traditional clinical trial, Long-acting Beta Agonist Step Down Study (LASST) which will allow for direct comparison of processes and outcomes between the streamlined and traditional approach. Children 12 to 17 years old with asthma will be randomized to participate in this project (streamlined trial) or LASST (traditional trial). In this proposal we will: measure comprehension of study information using an original questionnaire, Research Participant Assessment (developed at Nemours), following a parental permission/assent process delivered over the internet in a dynamic interactive multi-media format (Specific Aim 1); measure the efficiency of participant driven data entry from home into a Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) online database using the iPad, and quality of spirometry with the EasyOne Plus handheld meter with remote coaching using the iPad (Specific Aim 2); test whether the streamlined approach has a trial effect by comparing the differences in Asthma Control Test (ACT) scores following 12 weeks of study drug treatment in children randomized to this project compared to LASST. We will collect effort reporting data to compare personnel costs between the trials. If this streamlined project lacks a trial effect and reduces costs compared to LASST, the methodologies would be generalizable to studies which include adults and other diseases.

Detailed description

Introduction Phase III / IV clinical trials are expensive and time consuming and often suffer from poor enrollment and retention rates. Pediatric trials are particularly difficult because scheduling around the parent, participant and potentially other sibling schedules can be burdensome. We are evaluating using the internet and mobile devices to conduct the consent process and study visits in a streamlined pediatric asthma trial. Our hypothesis is that these study processes will be noninferior and will be less expensive compared to a traditional pediatric asthma trial. Materials/Methods Parents and participants, aged 12 through 17 years, complete the informed consent process by viewing a multi-media website containing a consent video and study material in the streamlined trial. Participants are provided an iPad with WiFi (wireless internet) and EasyOne spirometer for use during FaceTime visits and online twice daily symptom reporting during an 8-week run-in followed by 12-week study period. Outcomes are compared with participants completing a similarly designed traditional trial comparing the same treatments within the same pediatric health-system. After 8 weeks of open-label Advair 250/50 twice daily, participants in both trial types are randomized to Advair 250/50, Flovent 250, or Advair 100/50 given 1 inhalation twice daily. Study staff track time spent to determine study costs. Results Participants have been enrolled in the streamlined and traditional trials and recruitment is ongoing. Conclusions This project will provide important information on both clinical and economic outcomes for a novel method of conducting clinical trials. The results will be broadly applicable to trials of other diseases.

Kathryn Blake, Holly Antal, H. Timothy Bunnell, Jiaxian He, Robert J. Henderson et al. (14 authors)

JMIR Pediatrics and Parenting2023-02-171 citations

10.2196/44252

Interventions

DRUGfluticasone/salmeterol 250/50 Dry Powder Inhaler

Participants will receive Advair Diskus 250/50 Dry Powder Inhaler, administered twice daily for 12 weeks after randomization

DRUGfluticasone/salmeterol 100/50 Dry Powder Inhaler

Participants will receive Advair Diskus 100/50 Dry Powder Inhaler administered twice daily for 12 weeks after randomization

DRUGfluticasone 100mcg Dry Powder Inhaler

Participants will receive Flovent Diskus 100mcg Dry Powder Inhaler administered twice daily for 12 weeks after randomization

Study design

Allocation

RANDOMIZED

Intervention model

PARALLEL

Primary purpose

OTHER

Masking

NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

ALL

Age

12 Years to 17 Years

Healthy volunteers

No

Inclusion criteria

Main Trial Inclusion Criteria: * Age 12-17 years * Physician diagnosed asthma (without any other co-morbid pulmonary disease) that is well-controlled on medium dose inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting β2-agonist given twice daily \[Advair Diskus (fluticasone propionate/salmeterol) 250/50mcg; Advair HFA (hydrofluoroalkane) (fluticasone propionate/salmeterol hydrofluoroalkane) 115/21mcg; Symbicort (budesonide/formoterol) 160/4.5mcg; Dulera (mometasone/formoterol) 100/4.5mcg\] based on an ACT score \> 20, and the absence of unscheduled visits or use of rescue prednisone for 4 weeks prior to enrollment * Pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in the first second \> 70% predicted * \< 10 pack/year history of tobacco use and abstinence for at least 1 year

Exclusion criteria

* Chronic oral steroid therapy * Hospitalization or urgent care visit within 4 weeks of the screening visit * Near fatal asthma within 2 years of enrollment or high risk of near fatal or fatal asthma 125-127 * Women who are pregnant or lactating Parallel MICT and Parallel LASST Inclusion Criteria: * Age 12-17 years * Physician diagnosed asthma (without any other co-morbid pulmonary disease) that is well-controlled on medium dose inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting β2-agonist given twice daily \[Advair Diskus (fluticasone propionate/salmeterol) 250/50mcg; Advair HFA (hydrofluoroalkane) (fluticasone propionate/salmeterol hydrofluoroalkane) 115/21mcg; Symbicort (budesonide/formoterol) 160/4.5mcg; Dulera (mometasone/formoterol) 100/4.5mcg\] based on an ACT score \> 20, and the absence of unscheduled visits or use of rescue prednisone for 4 weeks prior to enrollment * \< 10 pack/year history of tobacco use and abstinence for at least 1 year

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame	Description
Adolescent Research Participant Assessment Score at Screening (Visit 1, Week -8)	Screening (Visit 1, week -8)	The Research Participant Assessment Score (RPA Comprehension) was a 17-item questionnaire designed to assess comprehension of study information at screening (Visit 1, week -8) between MICT and LASST trial designs. The same 17-item questionnaire was administered to the adolescent participant and to the caregiver participant. The items were scored as 1=incorrect, 2=partially correct, 3=correct (minimum possible score=17 and maximum possible score=51). Scores were assigned by two trained coders who independently listed to audio recordings of the RPA Comprehension questionnaire administration. Scores from the two coders were averaged for a final score. Higher scores indicate better comprehension. Mean (95% Confidence Interval) are the outcome measure reported.
Caregiver Research Participant Assessment Score at Screening (Visit 1, Week -8)	Screening (Visit 1, week -8)	The Research Participant Assessment Score (RPA Comprehension) was a 17-item questionnaire designed to assess comprehension of study information at screening (Visit 1, week -8) between MICT and LASST trial designs. The same 17-item questionnaire was administered to the adolescent participant and to the caregiver participant. The items were scored as 1=incorrect, 2=partially correct, 3=correct (minimum possible score=17 and maximum possible score=51). Scores were assigned by two trained coders who independently listed to audio recordings of the RPA Comprehension questionnaire administration. Scores from the two coders were averaged for a final score. Higher scores indicate better comprehension. Mean (95% Confidence Interval) are the outcome measure reported.

Secondary

Measure	Time frame	Description
Asthma Control Test Scores at Screening (Visit 1, Week -8)	Screening (Visit 1, week -8)	The Asthma Control Test is a 5-item Likert scale questionnaire; Scaling of items 5-point scale (for symptoms and activities: 1=all the time to 5= not at all; for asthma control rating: 1=not controlled at all to 5=completely controlled); The score for each item is summed to generate a total score. The scores range from 5 (poor control of asthma) to 25 (complete control of asthma), with higher scores reflecting greater asthma control. An ACT score \>19 indicates well-controlled asthma. The study was powered to have greater than 90% power to detect a clinically meaningful difference of 3 in the ACT score between the MICT Trial Design and the LASST trial Design , assuming a mean score of 19 with a standard deviation of 4 (data from a previous ALA-ACRC trial).
Asthma Control Test Score at Final Visit (Visit 6, Week12)	Final Visit (Visit 6, Week 12)	The Asthma Control Test is a 5-item Likert scale questionnaire; Scaling of items 5-point scale (for symptoms and activities: 1=all the time to 5= not at all; for asthma control rating: 1=not controlled at all to 5=completely controlled); The score for each item is summed to generate a total score. The scores range from 5 (poor control of asthma) to 25 (complete control of asthma), with higher scores reflecting greater asthma control. An ACT score \>19 indicates well-controlled asthma. The study was powered to have greater than 90% power to detect a clinically meaningful difference of 3 in the ACT score between the MICT Trial Design and the LASST trial Design , assuming a mean score of 19 with a standard deviation of 4 (data from a previous ALA-ACRC trial).
Spirometry Quality Control Grade	Visit 3 (week 0)	Spirometry grade scores in MICT participants (who performed spirometry at home) were compared with spirometry grade scores in LASST participants (who performed spirometry at the study sites). Spirometry grade scores were only available for LASST participants at Visit 3 (week 0), therefore only spirometry grade scores from Visit 3 were compared between MICT and LASST participants. Per the LASST trial no scoring was performed on the LASST participants for any other visit; the scoring for the LASST trial was for quality control only and was not a pre-specified trial outcome. Spirometry grade score scale was: 4.00 (highest=best possible score), 3.00, 2.00, 1.00, 0.00 (lowest=worst possible score). The maximum score was 4.00, the minimum score was 0.00. Higher scores indicate better spirometry score and therefore better quality.
Number of Errors in Questionnaires Completed by Participants at Visit 1 (Week -8).	Visit 1 (week -8)	This outcome was to measure differences in timeliness and completeness of forms completed at home through REDCap in MICT participants compared with LASST participants. No data were collected for this outcome. This is because in designing the REDCap database used to send questionnaires to the MICT trial participants and to store the responses from the completed questionnaires, data checks were put into place to prevent incomplete forms. We did this by requiring all fields to be completed before the questionnaire could be submitted. If a questionnaire was not submitted, the study coordinator re-sent the questionnaire to the participant and the questionnaire was completed during the FaceTime visit. For the LASST participants, the study coordinator reviewed all forms the participant completed at the study site visit and any incomplete fields were completed at the time of the study site visit.
Adolescent Research Participant Assessment Score at Study End (Visit 6, Week 12)	Final Visit (Visit 6, Week12)	The Research Participant Assessment Score (RPA Comprehension) was a 17-item questionnaire designed to assess comprehension of study information at screening (Visit 6, week 12) between MICT and LASST trial designs. The same 17-item questionnaire was administered to the adolescent participant and to the caregiver participant. The items were scored as 1=incorrect, 2=partially correct, 3=correct (minimum possible score=17 and maximum possible score=51). Scores were assigned by two trained coders who independently listed to audio recordings of the RPA Comprehension questionnaire administration. Scores from the two coders were averaged for a final score. Higher scores indicate better comprehension. Mean (95% Confidence Interval) are the outcome measure reported.
Number of Errors in Questionnaires Completed by Participants at Visit 3 (Week 0).	Visit 3 (week 0)	This outcome was to measure differences in timeliness and completeness of forms completed at home through REDCap in MICT participants compared with LASST participants. No data were collected for this outcome. This is because in designing the REDCap database used to send questionnaires to the MICT trial participants and to store the responses from the completed questionnaires, data checks were put into place to prevent incomplete forms. We did this by requiring all fields to be completed before the questionnaire could be submitted. If a questionnaire was not submitted, the study coordinator re-sent the questionnaire to the participant and the questionnaire was completed during the FaceTime visit. For the LASST participants, the study coordinator reviewed all forms the participant completed at the study site visit and any incomplete fields were completed at the time of the study site visit.
Number of Errors in Questionnaires Completed by Participants at Visit 4 (Week 3).	Visit 4 (week 3)	This outcome was to measure differences in timeliness and completeness of forms completed at home through REDCap in MICT participants compared with LASST participants. No data were collected for this outcome. This is because in designing the REDCap database used to send questionnaires to the MICT trial participants and to store the responses from the completed questionnaires, data checks were put into place to prevent incomplete forms. We did this by requiring all fields to be completed before the questionnaire could be submitted. If a questionnaire was not submitted, the study coordinator re-sent the questionnaire to the participant and the questionnaire was completed during the FaceTime visit. For the LASST participants, the study coordinator reviewed all forms the participant completed at the study site visit and any incomplete fields were completed at the time of the study site visit.
Number of Errors in Questionnaires Completed by Participants at Visit 5 (Week 6).	Visit 5 (week 6)	This outcome was to measure differences in timeliness and completeness of forms completed at home through REDCap in MICT participants compared with LASST participants. No data were collected for this outcome. This is because in designing the REDCap database used to send questionnaires to the MICT trial participants and to store the responses from the completed questionnaires, data checks were put into place to prevent incomplete forms. We did this by requiring all fields to be completed before the questionnaire could be submitted. If a questionnaire was not submitted, the study coordinator re-sent the questionnaire to the participant and the questionnaire was completed during the FaceTime visit. For the LASST participants, the study coordinator reviewed all forms the participant completed at the study site visit and any incomplete fields were completed at the time of the study site visit.
Number of Errors in Questionnaires Completed by Participants at Visit 6 (Week 12).	Visit 6 (week 12)	This outcome was to measure differences in timeliness and completeness of forms completed at home through REDCap in MICT participants compared with LASST participants. No data were collected for this outcome. This is because in designing the REDCap database used to send questionnaires to the MICT trial participants and to store the responses from the completed questionnaires, data checks were put into place to prevent incomplete forms. We did this by requiring all fields to be completed before the questionnaire could be submitted. If a questionnaire was not submitted, the study coordinator re-sent the questionnaire to the participant and the questionnaire was completed during the FaceTime visit. For the LASST participants, the study coordinator reviewed all forms the participant completed at the study site visit and any incomplete fields were completed at the time of the study site visit.
Number of Errors in Questionnaires Completed by Participants at Visit 2 (Week -4).	Visit 2 (week -4)	This outcome was to measure differences in timeliness and completeness of forms completed at home through REDCap in MICT participants compared with LASST participants. No data were collected for this outcome. This is because in designing the REDCap database used to send questionnaires to the MICT trial participants and to store the responses from the completed questionnaires, data checks were put into place to prevent incomplete forms. We did this by requiring all fields to be completed before the questionnaire could be submitted. If a questionnaire was not submitted, the study coordinator re-sent the questionnaire to the participant and the questionnaire was completed during the FaceTime visit. For the LASST participants, the study coordinator reviewed all forms the participant completed at the study site visit and any incomplete fields were completed at the time of the study site visit.
Caregiver Research Participant Assessment Score at Study End (Visit 6, Week 12)	Final Visit (Visit 6, Week12)	The Research Participant Assessment Score (RPA Comprehension) was a 17-item questionnaire designed to assess comprehension of study information at screening (Visit 6, week 12) between MICT and LASST trial designs. The same 17-item questionnaire was administered to the adolescent participant and to the caregiver participant. The items were scored as 1=incorrect, 2=partially correct, 3=correct (minimum possible score=17 and maximum possible score=51). Scores were assigned by two trained coders who independently listed to audio recordings of the RPA Comprehension questionnaire administration. Scores from the two coders were averaged for a final score. Higher scores indicate better comprehension. Mean (95% Confidence Interval) are the outcome measure reported.

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Participants by arm

Arm	Count
MICT Trial Design Participants randomized to MICT will complete study procedures using an iPad for data entry and FaceTime visits rather than coming into the study site for onsite visits. Participants will perform spirometry at home using a handheld spirometer, EasyOne Plus. Randomized to one of 3 study treatments: fluticasone/salmeterol 250/50 Dry Powder Inhaler one inhalation twice daily, or fluticasone/salmeterol 100/50 Dry Powder Inhaler one inhalation twice daily, or fluticasone 100mcg Dry Powder Inhaler one inhalation twice daily	54
LASST Trial Design Participants randomized to LASST will complete study procedures in the traditional format in which all study visits are conducted at the study site, all questionnaires are completed by pen/paper, and all spirometry is performed at the clinic site. Randomized to one of 3 study treatments: fluticasone/salmeterol 250/50 Dry Powder Inhaler one inhalation twice daily, or fluticasone/salmeterol 100/50 Dry Powder Inhaler one inhalation twice daily, or fluticasone 100mcg Dry Powder Inhaler one inhalation twice daily	25
Total	79

Withdrawals & dropouts

Period	Reason	FG000	FG001
Overall Study	Lost to Follow-up	5	1
Overall Study	moved out of state	0	1
Overall Study	Protocol Violation	12	8
Overall Study	Withdrawal by Subject	1	2

Baseline characteristics

Characteristic	MICT Trial Design	Total	LASST Trial Design
Age, Continuous	14 years	14 years	15 years
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Hispanic or Latino	49 Participants	51 Participants	2 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Not Hispanic or Latino	5 Participants	28 Participants	23 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported	0 Participants	0 Participants	0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB) American Indian or Alaska Native	2 Participants	2 Participants	0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB) Asian	1 Participants	1 Participants	0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB) Black or African American	16 Participants	26 Participants	10 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB) More than one race	5 Participants	5 Participants	0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander	0 Participants	0 Participants	0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported	0 Participants	0 Participants	0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB) White	30 Participants	45 Participants	15 Participants
Region of Enrollment United States	54 participants	79 participants	25 participants
Sex: Female, Male Female	22 Participants	34 Participants	12 Participants
Sex: Female, Male Male	32 Participants	45 Participants	13 Participants
Unscheduled Health Care Visit in Past 12 Months	23 Participants	32 Participants	9 Participants

Adverse events

Event type	EG000 affected / at risk	EG001 affected / at risk
deaths Total, all-cause mortality	0 / 53	0 / 25
other Total, other adverse events	42 / 53	10 / 25
serious Total, serious adverse events	2 / 53	1 / 25

Outcome results

Primary

Adolescent Research Participant Assessment Score at Screening (Visit 1, Week -8)

The Research Participant Assessment Score (RPA Comprehension) was a 17-item questionnaire designed to assess comprehension of study information at screening (Visit 1, week -8) between MICT and LASST trial designs. The same 17-item questionnaire was administered to the adolescent participant and to the caregiver participant. The items were scored as 1=incorrect, 2=partially correct, 3=correct (minimum possible score=17 and maximum possible score=51). Scores were assigned by two trained coders who independently listed to audio recordings of the RPA Comprehension questionnaire administration. Scores from the two coders were averaged for a final score. Higher scores indicate better comprehension. Mean (95% Confidence Interval) are the outcome measure reported.

Time frame: Screening (Visit 1, week -8)

Population: One participant in the MICT trial arm who was randomized to treatment at Visit 3 did not complete the study through Visit 6.

Arm	Measure	Value (MEAN)
MICT Trial Design	Adolescent Research Participant Assessment Score at Screening (Visit 1, Week -8)	41.08 Scores on a scale
LASST Trial Design	Adolescent Research Participant Assessment Score at Screening (Visit 1, Week -8)	42.26 Scores on a scale

Primary

Caregiver Research Participant Assessment Score at Screening (Visit 1, Week -8)

The Research Participant Assessment Score (RPA Comprehension) was a 17-item questionnaire designed to assess comprehension of study information at screening (Visit 1, week -8) between MICT and LASST trial designs. The same 17-item questionnaire was administered to the adolescent participant and to the caregiver participant. The items were scored as 1=incorrect, 2=partially correct, 3=correct (minimum possible score=17 and maximum possible score=51). Scores were assigned by two trained coders who independently listed to audio recordings of the RPA Comprehension questionnaire administration. Scores from the two coders were averaged for a final score. Higher scores indicate better comprehension. Mean (95% Confidence Interval) are the outcome measure reported.

Time frame: Screening (Visit 1, week -8)

Population: One participant in the MICT trial arm who was randomized to treatment at Visit 3 did not complete the study through Visit 6. Thus, the caregiver did not complete the Research Participant Assessment at Visit 6.

Arm	Measure	Value (MEAN)
MICT Trial Design	Caregiver Research Participant Assessment Score at Screening (Visit 1, Week -8)	43.2 Scores on a scale
LASST Trial Design	Caregiver Research Participant Assessment Score at Screening (Visit 1, Week -8)	42.9 Scores on a scale

Secondary

Adolescent Research Participant Assessment Score at Study End (Visit 6, Week 12)

The Research Participant Assessment Score (RPA Comprehension) was a 17-item questionnaire designed to assess comprehension of study information at screening (Visit 6, week 12) between MICT and LASST trial designs. The same 17-item questionnaire was administered to the adolescent participant and to the caregiver participant. The items were scored as 1=incorrect, 2=partially correct, 3=correct (minimum possible score=17 and maximum possible score=51). Scores were assigned by two trained coders who independently listed to audio recordings of the RPA Comprehension questionnaire administration. Scores from the two coders were averaged for a final score. Higher scores indicate better comprehension. Mean (95% Confidence Interval) are the outcome measure reported.

Time frame: Final Visit (Visit 6, Week12)

Population: One participant in the MICT trial arm who was randomized to treatment at Visit 3 did not complete the study through Visit 6.

Arm	Measure	Value (MEAN)
MICT Trial Design	Adolescent Research Participant Assessment Score at Study End (Visit 6, Week 12)	41.22 Scores on a scale
LASST Trial Design	Adolescent Research Participant Assessment Score at Study End (Visit 6, Week 12)	41.27 Scores on a scale

Secondary

Asthma Control Test Score at Final Visit (Visit 6, Week12)

The Asthma Control Test is a 5-item Likert scale questionnaire; Scaling of items 5-point scale (for symptoms and activities: 1=all the time to 5= not at all; for asthma control rating: 1=not controlled at all to 5=completely controlled); The score for each item is summed to generate a total score. The scores range from 5 (poor control of asthma) to 25 (complete control of asthma), with higher scores reflecting greater asthma control. An ACT score \>19 indicates well-controlled asthma. The study was powered to have greater than 90% power to detect a clinically meaningful difference of 3 in the ACT score between the MICT Trial Design and the LASST trial Design , assuming a mean score of 19 with a standard deviation of 4 (data from a previous ALA-ACRC trial).

Time frame: Final Visit (Visit 6, Week 12)

Population: The participant data set includes all participants who were randomized in each arm, the MICT trial design or LASST trial design. One participant in the MICT trial arm who was randomized to treatment at Visit 3 did not complete the study through Visit 6. The last available ACT score was used for this participant.

Arm	Measure	Value (MEDIAN)
MICT Trial Design	Asthma Control Test Score at Final Visit (Visit 6, Week12)	24 scores on a scale
LASST Trial Design	Asthma Control Test Score at Final Visit (Visit 6, Week12)	23 scores on a scale

Secondary

Asthma Control Test Scores at Screening (Visit 1, Week -8)

The Asthma Control Test is a 5-item Likert scale questionnaire; Scaling of items 5-point scale (for symptoms and activities: 1=all the time to 5= not at all; for asthma control rating: 1=not controlled at all to 5=completely controlled); The score for each item is summed to generate a total score. The scores range from 5 (poor control of asthma) to 25 (complete control of asthma), with higher scores reflecting greater asthma control. An ACT score \>19 indicates well-controlled asthma. The study was powered to have greater than 90% power to detect a clinically meaningful difference of 3 in the ACT score between the MICT Trial Design and the LASST trial Design , assuming a mean score of 19 with a standard deviation of 4 (data from a previous ALA-ACRC trial).

Time frame: Screening (Visit 1, week -8)

Population: The participant data set includes all participants who were randomized in each arm, the MICT trial design or LASST trial design. One participant in the MICT trial arm who was randomized to treatment at Visit 3 did not complete the study through Visit 6. The last available ACT score was used for this participant.

Arm	Measure	Value (MEDIAN)
MICT Trial Design	Asthma Control Test Scores at Screening (Visit 1, Week -8)	22 scores on a scale
LASST Trial Design	Asthma Control Test Scores at Screening (Visit 1, Week -8)	22 scores on a scale

Secondary

Caregiver Research Participant Assessment Score at Study End (Visit 6, Week 12)

The Research Participant Assessment Score (RPA Comprehension) was a 17-item questionnaire designed to assess comprehension of study information at screening (Visit 6, week 12) between MICT and LASST trial designs. The same 17-item questionnaire was administered to the adolescent participant and to the caregiver participant. The items were scored as 1=incorrect, 2=partially correct, 3=correct (minimum possible score=17 and maximum possible score=51). Scores were assigned by two trained coders who independently listed to audio recordings of the RPA Comprehension questionnaire administration. Scores from the two coders were averaged for a final score. Higher scores indicate better comprehension. Mean (95% Confidence Interval) are the outcome measure reported.

Time frame: Final Visit (Visit 6, Week12)

Population: One participant in the MICT trial arm who was randomized to treatment at Visit 3 did not complete the study through Visit 6. Thus, the caregiver did not complete the Research Participant Assessment at Visit 6.

Arm	Measure	Value (MEAN)
MICT Trial Design	Caregiver Research Participant Assessment Score at Study End (Visit 6, Week 12)	43.28 Scores on a scale
LASST Trial Design	Caregiver Research Participant Assessment Score at Study End (Visit 6, Week 12)	41.08 Scores on a scale

Secondary

Number of Errors in Questionnaires Completed by Participants at Visit 1 (Week -8).

This outcome was to measure differences in timeliness and completeness of forms completed at home through REDCap in MICT participants compared with LASST participants. No data were collected for this outcome. This is because in designing the REDCap database used to send questionnaires to the MICT trial participants and to store the responses from the completed questionnaires, data checks were put into place to prevent incomplete forms. We did this by requiring all fields to be completed before the questionnaire could be submitted. If a questionnaire was not submitted, the study coordinator re-sent the questionnaire to the participant and the questionnaire was completed during the FaceTime visit. For the LASST participants, the study coordinator reviewed all forms the participant completed at the study site visit and any incomplete fields were completed at the time of the study site visit.

Time frame: Visit 1 (week -8)