ReviewTransactions of the American Clinical and Climatological Association2014
The role of pragmatic clinical trials in the evolution of learning health systems.
Review in Transactions of the American Clinical and Climatological Association, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Considerations When Designing and Implementing Pragmatic Clinical Trials That Include Older Hispanics.Ethnicity & disease · 2023Article
- Building Evidence for Clinical Use of Pharmacogenomics and Reimbursement for Testing.Clinics in laboratory medicine · 2022Review
- Clinically Excellent Use of the Electronic Health Record: Review.JMIR human factors · 2018Review
- A Call for Electronic Health Record-based Data Sharing for Clinical Trials in Critical Care.Journal of medical systems · 2018Article
- A pragmatic randomized trial comparing tablet computer informed consent to traditional paper-based methods for an osteoporosis study.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2016Article
- Clinical Comparative Effectiveness Research Through the Lens of Healthcare Decisionmakers.Ochsner journal · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) test clinical interventions (eg, treatments, diagnostic tests, delivery strategies) that are widely used in practice and for which there is often clinical equipoise. Similar to traditional explanatory trials of novel therapeutics, PCTs use randomization to decrease selection bias. In contrast, PCTs rely on extant data sources (eg, electronic medical records [EMRs]) and test interventions that can be implemented with minimal research infrastructures. Thus, PCTs have drawn interest as vehicles for decreasing the cost of clinical research and for creating learning health systems, which, as articulated by the Institute of Medicine, seek to generate new knowledge as an integral by-product of the delivery experience. However, realizing this vision for PCTs will require innovative approaches for engaging clinicians, improving the efficiency of subject recruitment, improving the reliability of EMR data, and new paradigms for the regulatory review of low-risk trials to decrease unncessary hurdles to practice-based knowledge generation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25125735PMC4112713What 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.