ArticleFrontiers in drug safety and regulation2023
External Comparator Cohort studies - clarification of terminology.
Article in Frontiers in drug safety and regulation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Sieving for gold: external comparator studies to prioritize drugs for late-stage clinical trial.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2026Review
- External Comparator Studies: Performance of Four Missing Data-Handling Approaches, Stratified by Four Different Marginal Estimators.Drug safety · 2025Article
- Challenges in estimating the counterfactual placebo HIV incidence rate from a registration cohort: The PrEPVacc trial.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2025Article
- Examining the Effect of Missing Data and Unmeasured Confounding on External Comparator Studies: Case Studies and Simulations.Drug safety · 2024Article
- Important tool in our rare disease toolbox: hybrid retrospective-prospective natural history studies serve well as external comparators for rare disease studies.Frontiers in drug safety and regulation · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Though there is only one term for the gold standard of Randomized Controlled Trials the terminology used for controlled research involving external data is diverse. Common terms include External Comparator/Control Arm study, Externally Controlled Trial, Synthetic Control study and Historical Control study. The term Externally Controlled Trial was recently selected by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and is in line with the use case of a pivotal trial. It entails pre-specification of the external dataset and its analysis in the trial protocol, which produces the highest amount of transparency, which is an important aspect for maximum credibility. If this pre-specification did not occur, we advocate the term External Comparator Cohort study (or short External Comparator study), which is derived by scrutinizing the paired terms study/trial, control/comparator and arm/cohort. Furthermore, we propose an overall framework of nomenclature, which is generally applicable for research projects involving external data. Only a precise and consistent use of terminology will most effectively safeguard from unintended implications, inaccurate perceptions, and misguided mindsets.
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.