Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38992786›Full record

ArticleTrials2024

The development of a set of key points to aid clinicians and researchers in designing and conducting n-of-1 trials.

Robin Chatters, Olivia Hawksworth, Steven Julious, Andrew Cook

Erratum issued Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT07190989 (Inter-individual Variability of Sleep Outcome Measures in Response to Nutritional Blend Supplementation), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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.

NCT07190989 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Inter-individual Variability of Sleep Outcome Measures in Response to Nutritional Blend Supplementation: a Replicate Crossover Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorAspire AcademyRan2025 to 2025Enrolled15ConditionsHealthyArmsNutritional Supplement, Maltodextrin (Placebo)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Robin ChattersSheffield Clinical Trials Research Unit (CTRU), Sheffield Centre for Health and Related Research (SCHARR), The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. r.chatters@sheffield.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1945-6011
Olivia HawksworthSheffield Clinical Trials Research Unit (CTRU), Sheffield Centre for Health and Related Research (SCHARR), The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Steven JuliousSheffield Centre for Health and Related Research (SCHARR), The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Andrew CookClinical Trials Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionn-of-1 trials are undertaken to optimise the evaluation of health technologies in individual patients. They involve a single patient receiving treatments, both interventional and control, consecutively over set periods of time, the order of which is decided at random. Although n-of-1 trials are undertaken in medical research it could be argued they have the utility to be undertaken more frequently. We undertook the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) commissioned DIAMOND (Development of generalisable methodology for n-of-1 trials delivery for very low volume treatments) project to develop key points to assist clinicians and researchers in designing and conducting n-of-1 trials.

methodsThe key points were developed by undertaking a stakeholder workshop, followed by a discussion within the study team and then a stakeholder dissemination and feedback event. The stakeholder workshop sought to gain the perspectives of a variety of stakeholders (including clinicians, researchers and patient representatives) on the design and use of n-of-1 trials. A discussion between the study team was held to reflect on the workshop and draft the key points. Lastly, the stakeholders from the workshop were invited to a dissemination and feedback session where the proposed key points were presented and their feedback gained.

resultsA set of 22 key points were developed based on the insights from the workshop and subsequent discussions. They provide guidance on when an n-of-1 trial might be a viable or appropriate study design and discuss key decisions involved in the design of n-of-1 trials, including determining an appropriate number of treatment periods and cycles, the choice of comparator, recommended approaches to randomisation and blinding, the use of washout periods and approaches to analysis.

conclusionsThe key points developed in the project will support clinical researchers to understand key considerations when designing n-of-1 trials. It is hoped they will support the wider implementation of the study design.

Indexed as

Research DesignResearch PersonnelStakeholder ParticipationClinical Trials as TopicConsensusHumansTechnology Assessment, BiomedicalTreatment OutcomeCross-over trialsKey pointsn-of-1Personalised medicineRare diseases

Identifiers

PMID38992786
PMCPMC11241860

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.