ArticleWorld neurosurgery: X2024
Why are clinical trials of deep brain stimulation terminated? An analysis of clinicaltrials.gov.
Article in World neurosurgery: X, 2024. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Challenges and solutions to participation in mental health clinical trials: Count Me In 2.0.BMJ mental health · 2026Article
- Approaches in analyzing predictors of trial failure: a scoping review and meta-epidemiological study.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Article
- Research waste of randomized controlled trials related to deep brain stimulation: a cross-sectional analysis.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2026Article
- Harnessing the sensing and stimulation function of deep brain-machine interfaces: a new dawn for overcoming substance use disorders.Translational psychiatry · 2024Review
- Why are clinical trials of deep brain stimulation terminated? An analysis of clinicaltrials.gov (new version).Brain & spine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Although deep brain stimulation (DBS) has established uses for patients with movement disorders and epilepsy, it is under consideration for a wide range of neurologic and neuropsychiatric conditions. Objective: To review successful and unsuccessful DBS clinical trials and identify factors associated with early trial termination. Methods: The ClinicalTrials.gov database was screened for all studies related to DBS. Information regarding condition of interest, study aim, trial design, trial success, and, if applicable, reason for failure was collected. Trials were compared and logistic regression was utilized to identify independent factors associated with trial termination. Results: Of 325 identified trials, 79.7% were successful and 20.3% unsuccessful. Patient recruitment, sponsor decision, and device issues were the most cited reasons for termination. 242 trials (74.5%) were interventional with 78.1% successful. There was a statistically significant difference between successful and unsuccessful trials in number of funding sources ( Conclusion: One in five clinical trials for DBS were found to be unsuccessful, most commonly due to patient recruitment difficulties. The source of funding was the only factor associated with trial success. As DBS research continues to grow, understanding the current state of clinical trials will help design successful future studies, thereby minimizing futile expenditures of time, cost, and patient engagement.
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.