Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39139775›Full record

ReviewTopics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation2024

Data Safety Monitoring Boards: Overview of Structure and Role in Spinal Cord Injury Studies.

Andrew R Blight, James D Guest, James Hamer, Jane T C Hsieh, Linda Jones, David S K Magnuson, Kimberley Pfleeger

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Topics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation, 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

7 authors.

Andrew R BlightUniversity of Plymouth, United Kingdom.
James D GuestSchool of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida.
James HamerDP Clinical Inc., Rockville, Maryland.
Jane T C HsiehWings for Life, Toronto, Ontario.
Linda JonesBoulder, Colorado.
David S K MagnusonUniversity of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky.
Kimberley PfleegerAbbVie Inc., North Chicago, Illinois.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper provides an overview of the history, composition, organization, responsibilities, and regulatory requirements of Data Safety Monitoring Boards (DSMB), with particular reference to the context of clinical trials in spinal cord injury. It is intended to help potential members of such boards and those undertaking the design of new clinical trials to understand the important role of the DSMB in safeguarding the integrity of complex trials, promoting safety, and countering potential bias. An independent DSMB helps to protect research subjects by providing study oversight and serves as an additional step to assure that clinical trials are performed to existing and appropriate standards. The DSMB must meet on a regular schedule, diligently evaluate all the information it receives, and report in a timely and decisive manner. Members must be free of significant conflicts of interest throughout the study and be adequately trained and experienced to serve their roles within the group. DSMB service can be a valuable learning experience and a gratifying opportunity to participate in advancing medicine and helping to maintain and improve the standards of research.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials Data Monitoring CommitteesSpinal Cord InjuriesClinical Trials as TopicHumansbiasclinical trialsdata monitoring committeedevelopmentpatient safety

Identifiers

PMID39139775
PMCPMC11317646

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.