ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2023
Impact of surrogate outcomes in randomized controlled trials for shoulder rotator cuff tears.
Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSurrogate outcomes are clinical endpoints that are used as substitutes for direct measures of how a patient feels, functions, or survives. The present study aims to analyze the impact of surrogate outcomes on the results of randomized controlled trials on shoulder rotator cuff tears disorders.
methodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to rotator cuff tear conditions published up until 2021 were retrieved from the PubMed and ACCESSSS databases. The primary outcome of the article was considered a surrogate outcome when the authors used radiological, physiologic, or functional variables. The result of the article was considered positive when results supported the intervention based on the trial's primary outcome. We recorded the sample size, the mean follow-up, and the type of funding. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.
resultsA total of 112 papers were included in the analysis. The mean sample size was 87.6 patients; mean follow-up period was 25.97 months. Thirty-six out of 112 RCTs used a surrogate outcome as a primary endpoint. More than half of papers using surrogate outcomes reported a positive finding (20 out of 36), while 10 out of 71 RCTs using patient-centered outcomes favored the intervention (14.08%, p < 0.001) [RR = 3.94 (95% CI 2.07-7.51)]. The mean sample size was smaller in trials using surrogate endpoints (75.11 vs 92.35 patients, respectively, p = 0.049), while the follow-up was shorter (14.12 m vs. 31.9 m, p < 0.001). Approximately 25% of the papers that reported surrogate endpoints (22.58%) were industry-funded projects.
conclusionsThe substitution of surrogate endpoints for patient-important outcomes in shoulder rotator cuff trials quadruplicates the chances of obtaining a favorable result that favors the analyzed intervention.
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.