ArticleBMC medical ethics2020
Redundant trials can be prevented, if the EU clinical trial regulation is applied duly.
Article in BMC medical ethics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Are orthodontic randomised controlled trials justified with a citation of an appropriate systematic review?Progress in orthodontics · 2021Pooled it
- Natural product extracts for ischemic stroke: a methodological evaluation and meta-epidemiological analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Inclusion, characteristics and methodological limitations of systematic reviews in doctoral theses: A cross-sectional study of all universities in Sweden.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2025Article
- Redefining cancer research for therapeutic breakthroughs.British journal of cancer · 2024Review
- The use of systematic reviews for conducting new studies in physiotherapy research: a meta-research study comparing author guidelines of physiotherapy-related journals.Systematic reviews · 2024Article
- Assessing patient risk, benefit and outcomes in drug development: an observational study of regorafenib clinical trials.BMJ oncology · 2024Article
- Ethical challenges of clinical trials with a repurposed drug in outbreaks.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2023Article
- Definition, harms, and prevention of redundant systematic reviews.Systematic reviews · 2023Article
- European birth cohorts: a consideration of what they have addressed so far.BMC pediatrics · 2022Article
- Barriers and Facilitating Factors for Conducting Systematic Evidence Assessments in Academic Clinical Trials.JAMA network open · 2021Article
- Multi-country collaboration in responding to global infectious disease threats: lessons for Europe from the COVID-19 pandemic.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The problem of wasteful clinical trials has been debated relentlessly in the medical community. To a significant extent, it is attributed to redundant trials - studies that are carried out to address questions, which can be answered satisfactorily on the basis of existing knowledge and accessible evidence from prior research. This article presents the first evaluation of the potential of the EU Clinical Trials Regulation 536/2014, which entered into force in 2014 but is expected to become applicable at the end of 2021, to prevent such trials. Having reviewed provisions related to the trial authorisation, we propose how certain regulatory requirements for the assessment of trial applications can and should be interpreted and applied by national research ethics committees and other relevant authorities in order to avoid redundant trials and, most importantly, preclude the unnecessary recruitment of trial participants and their unjustified exposure to health risks.
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.