Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28675646›Full record

ArticleClinical and translational science2017

The Burden of the "False-Negatives" in Clinical Development: Analyses of Current and Alternative Scenarios and Corrective Measures.

T Burt, K S Button, Hhz Thom, R J Noveck, M R Munafò

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and translational science, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Updated evidence on the accuracy ofQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026
    Review
  3. Quo Vadis translational neuroscience?Translational neuroscience · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. DRAVA: Aligning Human Concepts with Machine Learning Latent Dimensions for the Visual Exploration of Small Multiples.Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. CHI Conference · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Statistical Accuracy in Rheumatology Research.Mediterranean journal of rheumatology · 2019
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

T BurtBurt Consultancy, LLC., Durham, North Carolina, USA.
K S ButtonDepartment of Psychology, University of Bath, UK.
Hhz ThomSchool of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
R J NoveckDepartment of Medicine, Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Duke Clinical Research Unit, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
M R MunafòMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies, School of Experimental Psychology, University of Bristol, UK.

Funding

Duke CTSA (Composite)UL1TR001117 · NCATS · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI BOULWARE, LEIGH E, LI, JENNIFER S · 2013 to 2017
$41.3M
Medical Research Council MC_UU_12013/6Medical Research Council MR/K025643/1NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001117
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The "false-negatives" of clinical development are the effective treatments wrongly determined ineffective. Statistical errors leading to "false-negatives" are larger than those leading to "false-positives," especially in typically underpowered early-phase trials. In addition, "false-negatives" are usually eliminated from further testing, thereby limiting the information available on them. We simulated the impact of early-phase power on economic productivity in three developmental scenarios. Scenario 1, representing the current status quo, assumed 50% statistical power at phase II and 90% at phase III. Scenario 2 assumed increased power (80%), and Scenario 3, increased stringency of alpha (1%) at phase II. Scenario 2 led, on average, to a 60.4% increase in productivity and 52.4% increase in profit. Scenario 3 had no meaningful advantages. Our results suggest that additional costs incurred by increasing the power of phase II studies are offset by the increase in productivity. We discuss the implications of our results and propose corrective measures.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicFalse Negative ReactionsComputer SimulationCosts and Cost AnalysisHumansProbabilityTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID28675646
PMCPMC6402187

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.