Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37874638›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2023

Challenges With the Use of Digital Sham: Systematic Review and Recommendations.

Ernst Bos, Katrin H Preller, Gavneet Kaur, Pooja Malhotra, Saifuddin Kharawala, Dario Motti

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ernst BosF Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland.ORCID 0009-0009-4941-0629
Katrin H PrellerF Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-0413-7672
Gavneet KaurBridge Medical Consulting Limited, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-8533-0575
Pooja MalhotraBridge Medical Consulting Limited, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0009-0008-9000-1096
Saifuddin KharawalaBridge Medical Consulting Limited, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9771-1612
Dario MottiF Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-7714-4040
Roche (Switzerland) · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDigital therapeutics (DTx) are software-based products that prevent, manage, or treat a medical condition and are delivered through a smartphone app, web application, or wearable device. Clinical trials assessing DTx pose challenges, foremost among which is designing appropriate digital shams (or digital placebos), which should ideally mimic DTx (in terms of design, components, and duration of treatment) while omitting the active principle or component.

objectiveThe objective of our review was to understand how digital shams are being used in clinical research on DTx in neuroscience, which is the most common therapy area for DTx.

methodsWe conducted a systematic literature review of DTx in neuroscience (including neurodevelopmental, neurodegenerative, and psychiatric disorders) with a focus on controlled clinical trials involving digital shams. Studies were identified from trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, the European Union Clinical Trials Register, and Trial Trove) and through structured searches in MEDLINE and Embase (both via the Embase website) and were limited to articles in English published from 2010 onward. These were supplemented by keyword-based searches in PubMed, Google, and Google Scholar and bibliographic searches. Studies assessing DTx in neuroscience (including neurodevelopmental, neurodegenerative, and psychiatric disorders) were included. Details related to the publication, DTx, comparator, patient population, and outcomes were extracted and analyzed.

resultsOur search criteria identified 461 neuroscience studies involving 213 unique DTx. Most DTx were extended reality based (86/213, 40.4%) or mobile device based (56/213, 26.3%); 313 were comparative, of which 68 (21.7%) used shams. The most common therapeutic areas assessed in these studies were stroke (42/213, 19.7%), depression (32/213, 15%), and anxiety (24/213, 11.3%). The most common treatments were cognitive behavioral therapy or behavioral therapy (67/213, 32.4%), physical rehabilitation (60/213, 28.2%), and cognitive training (41/213, 19.2%). We identified the following important issues related to the use of digital shams in neuroscience: shams were not validated before use in studies, they varied widely in design (from being nearly identical to the DTx to using different software programs altogether), and the level of patient engagement or satisfaction with the sham and the impact of the sham on study outcomes were infrequently reported.

conclusionsDigital shams are critical for the clinical development of DTx in neuroscience. Given the importance of sham controls in evaluating DTx efficacy, we provide recommendations on the key information that should be reported in a well-designed DTx trial and propose an algorithm to allow the correct interpretation of DTx study results. Sham-controlled studies should be routinely used in DTx trials-in early-phase studies-to help identify DTx active components and-in late-phase studies-to confirm the efficacy of DTx. The use of shams early in development will ensure that the appropriate sham control is used in later confirmatory trials.

Indexed as

Mental DisordersMobile ApplicationsAnxietyComputers, HandheldHumanscognitive behavioral therapydigital interventionmobile phoneneurodegenerative diseasesneurosciencesplacebopsychiatric disordersshamsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID37874638
PMCPMC10630857
OpenAlexW4385063593

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.