ArticleNeurology international2024
Leaflet: Operative Steps for Interventional Studies in Neuroscience.
Article in Neurology international, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesDrug development involves multiple stages, spanning from initial discovery to clinical trials. This intricate process entails understanding disease mechanisms, identifying potential drug targets, and evaluating the efficacy and safety of candidate drugs. Clinical trials are designed to assess the effects of drugs on humans, focusing on determining safety profiles, appropriate modes of administration, and comparative efficacy against placebos. Notably, neuroscience drug development encounters distinct challenges, including the complex nature of diseases, limitations imposed by the blood-brain barrier, the absence of reliable predictive preclinical models, and regulatory hurdles. Ethical and safety considerations are pivotal due to the potential cognitive and motor effects of CNS-active drugs.
methodsOur manuscript outlines the procedures for CNS clinical trials and highlights the key elements of study design, methodological considerations, and ethical frameworks. To achieve our objectives, we considered the official websites of regulatory authorities, the EQUATOR network, and recent publications in the field. The paper includes key elements such as criteria for subject selection, methods of evaluation, variable analysis, and statistical methodology approaches.
resultsWe want to furnish a concise and comprehensive guide tailored to individuals new to CNS clinical trials, providing foundational elements necessary for the design and execution of such trials. The manuscript seeks to outline sources of relevant materials and elucidate adaptability, particularly in instances where sponsors may be absent.
conclusionsBy meeting the needs of less-experienced researchers or those with limited resources, the intention is to facilitate an understanding of the intricate nature of the process and offer guidance on appropriately navigating its complexities. It is essential to note that this manuscript does not aim to be exhaustive but endeavors to serve as a structured checklist. Through its approach, the manuscript aspires to offer guidance and support to individuals navigating the challenges inherent in this intricate domain.
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.