Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38707869›Full record

ArticleMedical devices (Auckland, N.Z.)2024

Reporting of Demographics & Subgroup Analyses in Premarketing Studies of FDA Approved High-Risk Cardiovascular Devices, 2014-2022.

Matthew J Swanson, Colin L Uyeki, Sarah R Yoder, Sanket S Dhruva, Jennifer E Miller, Joseph S Ross

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Matthew J SwansonFrank H. Netter MD School of Medicine, Quinnipiac University, North Haven, CT, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1762-5862
Colin L UyekiFrank H. Netter MD School of Medicine, Quinnipiac University, North Haven, CT, USA.
Sarah R YoderFrank H. Netter MD School of Medicine, Quinnipiac University, North Haven, CT, USA.
Sanket S DhruvaDepartment of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0674-2032
Jennifer E MillerDepartment of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Joseph S RossDepartment of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9218-3320

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Representation of diverse study populations in pivotal clinical trials for medical devices and subgroup analyses for demographic groups to explore differences in safety and effectiveness are essential to understanding the benefits and risks in diverse populations. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has taken many steps to improve transparency and subgroup analyses over the past decade, but there has not been a recent evaluation of demographic reporting and subgroup analyses. Methods: We reviewed all FDA Premarket Approvals for high-risk cardiovascular devices from 2014 to 2022, focusing on pivotal studies supporting device approval. We abstracted detailed demographic data about the age, sex, race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic position of study participants. We also assessed the presence and results of subgroup analyses to understand the safety and effectiveness of devices across trial populations. Results: Analysis of 92 pivotal studies revealed that age and sex were reported in 96.7% of the studies, while race and ethnicity were reported in 71.7% and 58.7%, respectively. However, only 7.9% of studies explicitly detailed the participation of older adults (≥65 years) and no studies reported patients' socioeconomic position. Subgroup analyses by sex were conducted in 70.7% of studies, with 12.3% reporting significant differences. In contrast, analyses by race and ethnicity were performed in only 12.0% of the studies, with 9.1% reporting significant differences. Conclusion: Approximately one-third of pivotal studies for high-risk cardiovascular devices approved by the FDA from 2014 to 2022 did not report the race of study participants, nearly 40% did not report ethnicity, and more than 90% did not report the participation of older adults (≥65 years). Subgroup analyses were infrequently conducted by age or race and ethnicity. There is a need for better trial demographic reporting and conduct of subgroup analyses in premarketing studies to ensure the safety and effectiveness of medical devices for all patients.

Indexed as

cardiovascular deviceclinical trialdiversityequityFDAinclusion

Identifiers

PMID38707869
PMCPMC11067925

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.