ArticleAnnals of clinical epidemiology2025
Designing Single-Arm Clinical Trials: Principles, Applications, and Methodological Considerations.
Article in Annals of clinical epidemiology, 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.
- Review
- Implementation of Digital Device-Assisted and Nurse-Led Case Management to Promote Self-Management in Adults With Noncommunicable Diseases: Protocol for a Single-Arm Intervention Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Nano-Encapsulated Spicule System Enhances Delivery of Wharton's Jelly MSC Secretome and Promotes Skin Rejuvenation: Preclinical and Clinical Evaluation.International journal of molecular sciences · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Single-arm trials (SATs) are clinical studies without a parallel control group, serving as a vital alternative to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in scenarios where traditional trial designs are impractical. These trials are particularly relevant in rare diseases, advanced malignancies, novel treatment modalities, and life-threatening conditions, where ethical concerns, logistical challenges, or small patient populations limit the feasibility of RCTs. SATs enable expedited evaluation of therapeutic interventions, often forming the foundation for regulatory approvals. This article explores the principles, applications, and methodological considerations of SATs. Their advantages include smaller sample size requirements, faster timelines, and regulatory acceptance by agencies such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA). Despite these benefits, SATs face challenges, such as potential biases due to the lack of a control group, limitations in endpoints, and reliance on historical controls that may compromise result validity. Best practices in SAT design are outlined, including refining scientific questions, defining eligibility criteria, selecting clinically meaningful endpoints, and employing robust statistical methods like Simon's two-stage design and Bayesian approaches.
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.