Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37775179›Full record

ArticleClinical medicine (London, England)2023

Delivering trials in the NHS: more than worth it.

Richard Haynes, Marion Mafham, Cheng Hock Toh, Martin J Landray

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical medicine (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Richard HaynesNuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK, and chief scientist, Protas, Salford, UK.
Marion MafhamNuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Cheng Hock TohUniversity of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK, and honorary consultant in haematology, Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK.
Martin J LandrayNuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK, and chief executive officer, Protas, Salford, UK martin.landray@ndph.ox.ac.uk.

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Randomised trials are the best method to determine the efficacy and safety of health technologies. A recent report by Lord O'Shaughnessy highlighted many of the current challenges to delivering trials in the UK and proposed potential solutions. Among these, making trials the business of all NHS institutions and a valued part of all doctors' work, while leveraging the potential of the data that the NHS collects routinely, offers an opportunity to improve NHS efficiency, doctors' job satisfaction and population health simultaneously.

Indexed as

PhysiciansState MedicineAttitude of Health PersonnelHumansJob Satisfactionclinical researchNHSrandomised trials

Identifiers

PMID37775179
PMCPMC10541267

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.