ReviewStroke2025
Adaptive Platform Trials in Stroke.
Review in Stroke, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Postoperative Neurocritical Care After Minimally Invasive Evacuation of Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage.Neurocritical care · 2026Review
- Barriers and Facilitators to Intracerebral Haemorrhage Platform Trial Recruitment: A Survey of Stroke Clinicians.Cerebrovascular diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
- Development of tenecteplase for stroke thrombolysis: Japan's endeavor.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2026Review
- Cytoprotection Concepts for Ischemic Stroke in the Recanalization Era.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Review
- Artificial Intelligence and Novel Trial Designs for Acute Ischemic Stroke: Opportunities and Challenges.Stroke · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Clinical trials of treatments for stroke have generally utilized 2-arm, randomized designs to evaluate a single intervention against a control. Running separate clinical trials, with each addressing a single therapeutic question, is resource intensive and slows evidence generation, especially in a field with rapidly expanding treatment options and evolving practices. Platform trials-randomized clinical trials designed to evaluate multiple interventions that may enter and exit the ongoing platform based on a master protocol-accelerate the investigation of multiple therapeutic options within a single infrastructure. This in turn has the potential to accelerate access to new interventions for patients with stroke that can save lives and improve outcomes. In the context of acute ischemic stroke, 2 new platform trials have been established, the STEP trial (StrokeNet Thrombectomy Endovascular Platform) and ACT-GLOBAL (A Multi-Factorial, Multi-Arm, Multi-Stage, Randomised, Global Adaptive Platform Trial for Stroke), to address multiple therapeutic questions simultaneously using a multifactorial design including Bayesian modeling and other adaptive features. These trials are designed to maximize the information obtained from each participant, to align clinical research more closely with the complexities of clinical care, and to accelerate the identification of effective therapies. This article explores conceptual, practical, and statistical considerations in the design and implementation of adaptive platform trials and highlights their potential to accelerate the identification of new therapies, management, and rehabilitation in stroke.
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.