Contemporary clinical trials
-
Contemp Clin Trials · Feb 2021
Meta AnalysisRemdesivir for the treatment of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
The nucleotide analogue prodrug remdesivir was among the first antiviral therapies to be tested in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for COVID-19. We performed a meta-analysis to understand efficacy and safety. ⋯ Patients given remdesivir are more likely to demonstrate recovery and were associated with higher rates of hospital discharge, but not with significant reduction in mean time to clinical improvement or mortality.
-
Contemp Clin Trials · Mar 2019
Synthesis of researcher reported strategies to recruit adults of ethnic minorities to clinical trials in the United Kingdom: A systematic review.
People from ethnic minorities are reported to have higher rates of physical illness (diabetes and ischemic heart disease) and mental disorders. Disparities relate not just to diagnosis, but also to care pathways and treatment outcomes. Despite this, they are underrepresented in clinical research. This reduces the generalisability of research findings across multi ethnic populations and hinders the development of accessible services. Researchers often face difficulties in recruiting ethnic minority participants to clinical research due to low levels of cultural competence and limited resources. There are few published trials focusing on ethnic minorities in the UK and we need to understand what recruitment strategies have already been implemented and recommended when recruiting ethnic participants. This will help researchers in applying these lessons to future clinical trials. ⋯ The review highlighted that researchers employed limited strategies to enhance the recruitment level. The full extent of the use of strategies was not described well in the publications. There is a need for wider training and support for the trialist to enhance and build up recruitment skills to facilitate the recruitment of ethnic minorities to clinical trials.
-
Contemp Clin Trials · Nov 2015
ReviewA decade of individual participant data meta-analyses: A review of current practice.
Individual participant data (IPD) systematic reviews and meta-analyses are often considered to be the gold standard for meta-analysis. In the ten years since the first review into the methodology and reporting practice of IPD reviews was published much has changed in the field. This paper investigates current reporting and statistical practice in IPD systematic reviews. ⋯ While the last ten years have seen substantial changes in how IPD meta-analyses are performed there remains considerable scope for improving the quality of reporting for both the process of IPD systematic reviews, and the statistical methods employed in them. It is to be hoped that the publication of the PRISMA-IPD guidelines specific to IPD reviews will improve reporting in this area.
-
Contemp Clin Trials · Nov 2015
ReviewA decade of individual participant data meta-analyses: A review of current practice.
Individual participant data (IPD) systematic reviews and meta-analyses are often considered to be the gold standard for meta-analysis. In the ten years since the first review into the methodology and reporting practice of IPD reviews was published much has changed in the field. This paper investigates current reporting and statistical practice in IPD systematic reviews. ⋯ While the last ten years have seen substantial changes in how IPD meta-analyses are performed there remains considerable scope for improving the quality of reporting for both the process of IPD systematic reviews, and the statistical methods employed in them. It is to be hoped that the publication of the PRISMA-IPD guidelines specific to IPD reviews will improve reporting in this area.
-
Contemp Clin Trials · Jul 2014
ReviewImprovement in the quality of abstracts in major clinical journals since CONSORT extension for abstracts: a systematic review.
We sought to determine if the publication of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT)(1) extension for abstracts in 2008 had led to an improvement in reporting abstracts of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).(2) METHODS: We searched PubMed for RCTs published in 2007 and 2012 in top-tier general medicine journals. A random selection of 100 trial abstracts was obtained for each year. Data were extracted in duplicate on the adherence to the CONSORT extension for abstracts. The primary outcome was the mean number of items reported and the secondary outcome was the odds of reporting each item. We also estimated incidence rate ratios (IRRs).(3) RESULTS: Significantly more checklist items were reported in 2012 than in 2007: adjusted mean difference was 2.91 (95% confidence interval [CI](4) 2.35, 3.41; p<0.001). In 2012 there were significant improvements in reporting the study as randomized in the title, describing the trial design, the participants, and objectives and blinding. In the Results section, trial status and numbers analyzed were also reported better. The IRRs were significantly higher for 2012 (IRR 1.32; 95% CI 1.25, 1.39; p<0.001) and in multisite studies compared to single site studies (IRR 1.08; 95% CI 1.03, 1.15; p=0.006). ⋯ There was a significant improvement in the reporting of abstracts of RCTs in 2012 compared to 2007. However, there is still room for improvement as some items remain under-reported.