ArticleClinical trials (London, England)2018
Ethics and practice of Trials within Cohorts: An emerging pragmatic trial design.
Article in Clinical trials (London, England), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04761133 (Antiseptic Pleural Irrigation for Patients With Pleural Infection), which is not on this map. Cited by 32 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.
Antiseptic Pleural Irrigation for Patients With Pleural Infection
Who cites it
32 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Trial
- The first patient-reported outcomes from the Utrecht Prostate Cohort (UPC): the first platform facilitating 'trials within cohorts' (TwiCs) for the evaluation of interventions for prostate cancer.World journal of urology · 2022Trial
- The adapted Zelen was a feasible design to trial exercise in myeloma survivors.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2020Trial
- Nephron Sparing Treatment (NEST) for small renal masses: understanding patients' and clinicians' experiences of a cohort-embedded randomised control trial.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2026Article
- Improving Digital Mental Health Services With and for National Minority, Indigenous, and Refugee Youth in Norway: TheJMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Could master protocols be adapted for effectiveness-implementation hybrid studies?BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- Optimizing clinical scientific research: the cohort intervention random sampling study with historical controls.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2025Article
- Generation Victoria (GenV): protocol for a longitudinal birth cohort of Victorian children and their parents.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Pragmatic Trial Design to Compare Real-world Effectiveness of Different Treatments for Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: The PRACTICE-IBD European Consensus.Journal of Crohn's & colitis · 2024Article
- Randomised trials conducted using cohorts: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Is it feasible to nest a Trial within a Cohort Study (TwiCS) to evaluate an early years parenting programme? A Born in Bradford's Better Start study protocol.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2024Article
- Design, implementation, and inferential issues associated with clinical trials that rely on data in electronic medical records: a narrative review.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Review
- Reflecting real-world patients with mesothelioma in research: an interim report of baseline characteristics from the ASSESS-meso cohort.ERJ open research · 2023Article
- Treatment de-escalation for stage II seminoma.Nature reviews. Urology · 2023Review
- The Trial within Cohorts (TwiCs) study design in oncology: experience and methodological reflections.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Article
- The ShortERJ open research · 2023Article
- Underestimating the benefits of screening colonoscopy for colorectal cancer.International journal of colorectal disease · 2023Article
- Participants' informed consent in adaptive, platform drug trials in hospitalized COVID-19 patients: Not all approaches are ethically acceptable.European journal of internal medicine · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on byRejoinder.2018
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWith increasing emphasis on pragmatic trials, new randomized clinical trial designs are being proposed to enhance the "real world" nature of the data generated. We describe one such design, appropriate for unmasked pragmatic clinical trials in which the control arm receives usual care, called "Trials within Cohorts" that is increasingly used in various countries because of its efficiency in recruitment, advantages in reducing subject burden, and ability to better mimic real-world consent processes.
methodsDescriptive, ethical, and US regulatory analysis of the Trials within Cohorts design.
resultsTrials within Cohorts design involves, after recruitment into a cohort, randomization of eligible subjects, followed by an asymmetric treatment of the two arms: those selected for the experimental arm provide informed consent for the intervention trial, while the data from the control arm are used based on prior broad permission. Thus, unlike the traditional Zelen post-randomization consent design, the cohort participants are informed about future research within the cohort; however, the extent of this disclosure currently varies among studies. Thus, ethical analysis is provided for two types of situations: when the pre-randomization disclosure and consent regarding the embedded trials are fairly explicit and detailed versus when they consist of only general statements about future data use. These differing ethical situations could have implications for how ethics review committees apply US research rules regarding waivers and alterations of informed consent.
conclusionTrials within Cohorts is a promising new pragmatic randomized controlled trial design that is being increasingly used in various countries. Although the asymmetric consent procedures for the experimental versus control arm subjects can initially raise ethical concerns, it is ethically superior to previous post-randomization consent designs and can have important advantages over traditional trial designs.
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.