SynthesisTrials2010
A systematic review of techniques and interventions for improving adherence to inclusion and exclusion criteria during enrolment into randomised controlled trials.
Synthesis in Trials, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intravenous amino acid therapy for kidney function in critically ill patients: a randomized controlled trial.Intensive care medicine · 2015Trial
- Evaluating the feasibility of a multicenter teleneonatology clinical effectiveness trial.Pediatric research · 2023Article
- [Enteral nutrition therapy in critical care : Current knowledge, controversies, and practical implementation].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2016Review
- Article
- Defining and Identifying Members of a Research Study Population: CTSA-Affiliated Faculty Members.Hypothesis : the newsletter of the Research Section of MLA · 2014Article
- SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2013 · on this mapArticle
- Failure to report protocol violations in clinical trials: a threat to internal validity?Trials · 2011Article
- Using real-time alerts for clinical trials: Identifying potential study subjects.Applied clinical informatics · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEnrolment of patients into a randomised controlled trial (RCT) in violation of key inclusion or exclusion criteria, may lead to excess avoidable harm. The purpose of this paper was to systematically identify and review techniques and interventions proven to prevent or avoid inappropriate enrolment of patients into RCTs.
methodsEMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Methodology Register, online abstract repositories, and conference websites were searched. Experts were contacted and bibliographies of retrieved papers hand-searched. The search cut-off date was 31 August 2009.
resultsNo primary publications were found. We identified one study in the grey literature (conference abstracts and presentations) reporting the results of an evaluation of the effectiveness of an intervention designed to prevent or avoid inappropriate enrolment of patients into an RCT. In the context of a multicentre trial, use of a dummy enrolment run-in phase was shown to reduce enrolment errors significantly (P < 0.001), from 16.1% during the run-in phase to < 1% after trial initiation.
conclusionsOur systematic search yielded only one technique or intervention shown to improve adherence to eligibility criteria during enrolment into RCTs. Given the potential harm involved in recruiting patients into a clinical trial in violation of key eligibility criteria, future research is needed to better inform those conducting clinical trials of how best to prevent enrolment errors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.