Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39410779›Full record

ArticleClinical trials (London, England)2025

Are pragmatism and ethical protections in clinical trials a zero-sum game?

Hayden P Nix, Charles Weijer, Monica Taljaard

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical trials (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Hayden P NixDepartment of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-4205-5857
Charles WeijerDepartment of Medicine, Western University, London, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-5510-1074
Monica TaljaardClinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3978-8961

Funding

Training Core (I)U54AG063546 · NIA · BROWN UNIVERSITY · PI JOSEPH E. GAUGLER · 2019 to 2026
$125.9M
NIA NIH HHS U54 AG063546
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRandomized controlled trials with pragmatic intent aim to generate evidence that directly informs clinical decisions. Some have argued that the ethical protection of informed consent can be in tension with the goals of pragmatism. But the impact of other ethical protections on trial pragmatism has yet to be explored. PURPOSE: In this article, we analyze the relationship between additional ethical protections for vulnerable participants and the degree of pragmatism within the PRagmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary-2 (PRECIS-2) domains of trial design.

methodsWe analyze three example trials with pragmatic intent that include vulnerable participants.

conclusionThe relationship between ethical protections and trial pragmatism is complex. In some cases, additional ethical protections for vulnerable participants can promote the pragmatism of some of the PRECIS-2 domains of trial design. When designing trials with pragmatic intent, researchers ought to look for opportunities wherein ethical protections enhance the degree of pragmatism.

Indexed as

Informed ConsentPragmatic Clinical Trials as TopicRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicResearch DesignEthics, ResearchHumansVulnerable Populationscritical caregeriatricsPragmatic trialspsychiatryresearch ethicsvulnerability

Identifiers

PMID39410779
PMCPMC11809111

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.