Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30467533›Full record

ArticleCurrent behavioral neuroscience reports2018

Principles of designing a clinical trial: optimizing chances of trial success.

Mirret M El-Hagrassy, Dante G G Duarte, Aurore Thibaut, Mariana F G Lucena, Felipe Fregni

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current behavioral neuroscience reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Efficacy assessment in phase I clinical trials: endpoints and challenges.Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. The status of clinical trials regarding root canal sealers.Restorative dentistry & endodontics · 2024
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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.

Mirret M El-HagrassyNeuromodulation Center, Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.
Dante G G DuarteNeuromodulation Center, Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.
Aurore ThibautNeuromodulation Center, Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.
Mariana F G LucenaNeuromodulation Center, Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.
Felipe FregniNeuromodulation Center, Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.

Funding

Pragmatic Trial of Remote tDCS and Somatosensory Training for Phantom Limb Pain with Machine Learning to Predict Treatment ResponseR01HD082302 · NICHD · SPAULDING REHABILITATION HOSPITAL · PI Felipe Fregni · 2015 to 2026
$4.7M
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD082302
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewClinical trials are essential to advance health care and develop new therapies. In this review we discuss the underlying principles of clinical trial design with an emphasis on assessing design risks that lead to trial failure as well as negative trials. While of general interest, this is perhaps particularly timely for the neuromodulation community, given the paucity of well-designed trials in the field. We give some examples from the phantom limb pain (PLP) literature. RECENT

findingsIt is critical to gather as much preliminary data as possible and to know how to interpret it in order to choose an appropriate trial design. Therefore, the investigator needs to effectively assess the likely trial design risk/benefit ratio with a view to maximizing the chance of a meaningful outcome, whether this outcome rejects or fails to reject the null hypothesis. This analysis is especially important in a complex and heterogeneous disorder such as PLP, which has had many negative trials. SUMMARY: We discuss the factors pertaining to a strong trial design benefit/risk assessment, how late trial phases require greater support from preliminary data, how to design trials to minimize risks, maximize benefits, and optimize internal validity as well as the chances of a positive outcome. We highlight the need for investigators to incorporate best practice in trial design to increase the chances of success, to always anticipate unexpected challenges during the trial.

Indexed as

clinical researchclinical trial phasesphantom limb painrisk benefit assessmentstudy characteristics

Identifiers

PMID30467533
PMCPMC6241291

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.