ArticleOrphanet journal of rare diseases2024
Multi-stakeholder sessions on major innovation topics in rare disease clinical trials.
Article in Orphanet journal of rare diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Does randomization matter in rare disease clinical trials.PloS one · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe European Joint Programme on Rare Diseases aims to enhance the rare diseases research ecosystem by bringing together stakeholders such as research funders, institutions and patient organizations. Work Package 20 focuses on the validation, use and development of innovative methodologies for rare disease clinical trials. This paper reports on the outcomes of a retreat held in April 2023, where areas for innovation and educational needs in rare disease clinical trials were discussed in multi-stakeholder sessions.
methodsMulti-stakeholder sessions covered the topics: Future Educational System, Randomization in Rare Disease Clinical Trials, Endpoints in Rare Disease Clinical Trials and Using History Course Data. The sessions began with expert presentations to set the scene, followed by guided discussions facilitated by questions on a collaborative digital whiteboard. Participants wrote responses, which were then discussed live with the experts.
resultsTraining is needed for diverse stakeholders in rare disease clinical trials to enhance understanding and drive innovation. Challenges include a lack of standardized terminology for multiple endpoints, inadequate understanding of randomization in small sample studies and various obstacles in effectively using natural history data.
conclusionCreating a comprehensive and sustainable educational program for rare diseases clinical trial methodology requires strategic collaboration and adherence to FAIR principles. The workshop highlighted the need for innovations for topics in areas such as handling missing data, optimizing the extraction of information from small samples, remote endpoint measurement and new randomized inference techniques. Additionally, integrating innovations into tailored training programs is crucial for advancing the field.
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.