ArticleContemporary clinical trials communications2025
Conducting clinical trials with self-collection of pharmacokinetic samples: Experience from an exploratory, phase 1, open-label trial of centanafadine SR in healthy individuals.
Article in Contemporary clinical trials communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Measurement of Centanafadine Concentrations in a Pharmacokinetic Trial: Comparison of Traditional Venipuncture Versus Blood Microsampling.Clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- The Supply of Investigational Medicinal Product and Management of Study Materials for Decentralized Participants-Insights from the Trials@Home RADIAL Proof-of-Concept Trial.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2025Article
- Advancing Early Clinical Trials: The Transformative Potential of Decentralized Designs and Digital Technologies in Phase 1 Clinical Trial.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated a shift to decentralized clinical trials. We present the potential feasibility of this approach from a phase 1 pharmacokinetic (PK) trial. Methods: Healthy adults (18-55 years) with a body mass index of 19.0-32.0 kg/m Results: Among 20 participants enrolled, 90 % were female, mean (SD) age was 35.9 (11.1) years. Verily platform/procedures facilitated successful remote vital sign collection in at least 75 %, ECGs in at least 80 %, and blood microsamples in 65 %-70 % of participants at visit 4. Most agreed that training was adequate, and they were able to complete trial procedures on their own. Participants favored self-collection over staff collection, having visits in their own location, and would consider participation in similar future research. Conclusions: Results from this decentralized PK trial, with remote, in-home sample collection and monitoring, demonstrated the potential feasibility of this study design.
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.