ReviewInnovations in clinical neuroscience
Ensuring Stakeholder Feedback in the Design and Conduct of Clinical Trials for Rare Diseases: ISCTM Position Paper of the Orphan Disease Working Group.
Review in Innovations in clinical neuroscience. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcome strategies for clinical trials in Neuropaediatric rare diseases.Neuroscience applied · 2026Review
- Methodological challenges in outcomes research for early-trials for implementation of new therapies in neuropediatric rare diseases.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2025Article
- Nursing's Role in Advancing Care for Rare Genetic Diseases.The Nursing clinics of North America · 2025Review
- Retrospective assessment of clinical global impression of severity and change in GM1 gangliosidosis: a tool to score natural history data in rare disease cohorts.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2025Article
- Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Approvals of Biological Drugs in 2023.Biomedicines · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 11 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The 1983 Orphan Drug Act in the United States (US) changed the landscape for development of therapeutics for rare or orphan diseases, which collectively affect approximately 300 million people worldwide, half of whom are children. The act has undoubtedly accelerated drug development for orphan diseases, with over 6,400 orphan drug applications submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from 1983 to 2023, including 350 drugs approved for over 420 indications. Drug development in this population is a global and collaborative endeavor. This position paper of the International Society for Central Nervous System Clinical Trials and Methodology (ISCTM) describes some potential best practices for the involvement of key stakeholder feedback in the drug development process. Stakeholders include advocacy groups, patients and caregivers with lived experience, public and private research institutions (including academia and pharmaceutical companies), treating clinicians, and funders (including the government and independent foundations). The authors articulate the challenges of drug development in orphan diseases and propose methods to address them. Challenges range from the poor understanding of disease history to development of endpoints, targets, and clinical trials designs, to finding solutions to competing research priorities by involved parties.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38495603PMC10941866W4394758932What 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.