Dataset Information

Systematic review to determine whether participation in a trial influences outcome.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To systematically compare the outcomes of participants in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with those in comparable non-participants who received the same or similar treatment.

Data sources

Bibliographic databases, reference lists from eligible articles, medical journals, and study authors.

Review methods

RCTs and cohort studies that evaluated the clinical outcomes of participants in RCTs and comparable non-participants who received the same or similar treatment.

Results

Five RCTs (six comparisons) and 50 cohort studies (85 comparisons) provided data on 31,140 patients treated in RCTs and 20,380 comparable patients treated outside RCTs. In the five RCTs, in which patients were given the option of participating or not, the comparisons provided limited information because of small sample sizes (a total of 412 patients) and the nature of the questions considered. 73 dichotomous outcomes were compared, of which 59 reported no statistically significant differences. For patients treated within RCTs, 10 comparisons reported significantly better outcomes and four reported significantly worse outcomes. Significantly heterogeneity was found (I2 = 89%) among the comparisons of 73 dichotomous outcomes; none of our a priori explanatory factors helped explain this heterogeneity. The 18 comparisons of continuous outcomes showed no significant differences in heterogeneity (I2 = 0%). The overall pooled estimate for continuous outcomes of the effect of participating in an RCT was not significant (standardised mean difference 0.01, 95% confidence interval -0.10 to 0.12).

Conclusion

No strong evidence was found of a harmful or beneficial effect of participating in RCTs compared with receiving the same or similar treatment outside such trials.

SUBMITTER: Vist GE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC558011 | biostudies-literature | 2005 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Systematic review to determine whether participation in a trial influences outcome.

Vist Gunn Elisabeth GE Hagen Kåre Birger KB Devereaux P J PJ Bryant Dianne D Kristoffersen Doris Tove DT Oxman Andrew David AD

BMJ (Clinical research ed.) 20050501 7501

<h4>Objective</h4>To systematically compare the outcomes of participants in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with those in comparable non-participants who received the same or similar treatment.<h4>Data sources</h4>Bibliographic databases, reference lists from eligible articles, medical journals, and study authors.<h4>Review methods</h4>RCTs and cohort studies that evaluated the clinical outcomes of participants in RCTs and comparable non-participants who received the same or similar treatmen ...[more]

PMID: 15905256

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAs of 2022, patient adherence to postoperative guidelines can reduce the risk of complications by up to 52.4% following laparoscopic abdominal surgery. With the availability of various preoperative education interventions (POEIs), understanding which POEI results in improvement in patient outcomes across the procedures is imperative.ObjectiveThis study aims to determine which POEI could be the most effective on patient outcomes by systematically reviewing all the POEIs reported in the literature.MethodsIn total, 4753 articles investigating various POEIs (eg, videos, presentations, mobile apps, and one-on-one education or coaching) were collected from the PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases. Inclusion criteria were adult patients undergoing abdominal laparoscopic surgery, randomized controlled trials, and studies that provided postoperative outcomes. Exclusion criteria included studies not published in English and with no outcomes reported. Title and abstract and full-text articles with POEI randomized controlled studies were screened based on the above criteria through a blinded, dual review using Covidence (Veritas Health Innovation). Study quality was assessed through the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. The included articles were analyzed for educational content, intervention timing, intervention type, and postoperative outcomes appropriate for a particular surgery.ResultsOnly 17 studies matched our criteria, with 1831 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, bariatric surgery (gastric bypass and gastric sleeve), and colectomy. In total, 15 studies reported a statistically significant improvement in at least 1 patient postoperative outcome. None of these studies were found to have an overall high risk of bias according to Cochrane standards. In total, 41% (7/17) of the included studies using direct individual education improved outcomes in almost all surgery types, while educational videos had the greatest statistically significant impact for anxiety, nausea, and pain postoperatively (P<.01). Direct group education demonstrated significant improvement in weight, BMI, exercise, and depressive symptoms in 33% (2/6) of the laparoscopic gastric bypass studies.ConclusionsDirect education (individual or group based) positively impacts postoperative laparoscopic surgery outcomes.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42023438698; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=438698.

Project description:BackgroundHidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic inflammatory disease that disproportionally affects women, as well as Black and biracial individuals. While adalimumab remains the only therapy approved by the Food and Drug Administration for HS, many HS clinical trials for novel and re-tasked therapies are ongoing or upcoming. To optimize treatment equity, reflect the patient population, and facilitate trial participation, it is important to elucidate aspects of clinical trial protocols that may systematically exclude specific patient groups or impose hardships.ObjectiveThe study aimed to systematically review inclusion and exclusion criteria as well as participant demographics in HS clinical trials.MethodsA literature search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central, and Web of Science databases was conducted. Peer-reviewed publications of randomized controlled trials that were written in English and had at least 10 participants were included. Title and abstract screening and data extraction were completed by two independent reviewers, with disagreements resolved by a third.ResultsTwenty-three studies totaling 1,496 adult participants met the inclusion criteria. Race and ethnicity were not reported in 473/1,496 (31.6%) and 1,420/1,496 (94.9%) trial participants, respectively. Trial participants were predominantly white (811/1,023, 79.3%) and female (1,057/1,457, 72.5%). The median of each study's average age was 35.7 years (IQR 33.5-38.0), and 17/23 (73.9%) trials excluded pediatric patients. Nearly all participants had Hurley Stage II (499/958, 52.0%) or Hurley Stage III (385/958, 40.2%) disease. Many trials excluded patients who were pregnant (19/23, 82.6%) and breastfeeding (13/23, 56.5%), or who had HS that was "too severe" (8/23, 34.8%) or "too mild" (16/23, 70.0%). Frequently, trial protocols required prolonged washout periods from HS therapies, relatively long duration in the study's placebo arm, and prohibited concurrent analgesic use.ConclusionsThis systematic review of 23 HS clinical trials totaling 1,496 participants identified substantial hardships imposed by trial participation, high rates of missing race and ethnicity data, and low representation of key patient groups, including those who identify as Black. Future trials with pragmatic study designs, broader inclusion criteria, and study sites in diverse communities may alleviate burdens of trial participation and improve enrollment of diverse patient groups.

Project description:IntroductionHearing aids are typically programmed using the individual's audiometric thresholds. Developments in technology have resulted in a new category of direct-to-consumer devices, which are not programmed using the individual's audiometric thresholds. This review aims to identify whether programming hearing aids using the individual's audiogram-based prescription results in better outcomes for adults with hearing loss.Methods and analysisThe methods of this review are reported in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols guidelines. On 23 August 2020, eight different databases were systematically searched without any restrictions: EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Emcare and Academic Search Premier. To ensure that this review includes the most recent evidence, the searches will be repeated at the final write-up stage. The population of interest of this review will be adults with any degree or type of hearing loss. The studies should compare hearing aids programmed using an audiogram-based prescription (and verified in the real ear) with those not programmed on the basis of the individual's audiogram. The primary outcome of interest is consumers' listening preferences. Hearing-specific health-related quality of life, self-reported listening ability, speech intelligibility of words and sentences in quiet and noisy situations, sound quality ratings and adverse events are the secondary outcomes of interest. Both randomised and non-randomised controlled trials will be included. The quality of each individual study and the overall evidence will be assessed using Downs and Black's checklist and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations tool, respectively.Ethics and disseminationWe will only retrieve and analyse data from published studies, so no ethical approval is required. The review findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at scientific conferences.Prospero registration numberCRD42020197232.

Project description:ObjectivesThis systematic review assessed which variables are associated with or are predictors for work participation outcomes in patients with systematic lupus erythematosus (SLE).MethodsA literature search using MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, Embase and CINAHL was conducted to identify all studies published from inception (1947) to June 2021 on factors related to and/or predicting employment status, absenteeism and/or presenteeism in SLE patients aged ≥18 years. The quality of included articles was assessed using the QUIPS tool. Narrative summaries were used to present the data.ResultsFifteen studies (nine on associations, four on predictions, and two assessing both) were included, encompassing data of 3800 employed patients. Younger age, Caucasian ethnicity, higher educational level, lower disease activity score, shorter disease duration, absence of specific disease manifestations, higher levels of physical functioning and less physical job demands and higher levels of psychological/cognitive functioning were associated with or predicted favorable work outcomes. Older age, non-Caucasian ethnicity, female gender, never being married, poverty, lower educational level, higher disease activity score, longer disease duration, specific disease manifestations, lower levels of physical functioning, more physical job demands and low job control, less job tenure and lower levels of cognitive functioning were associated with or predicted an unfavorable work outcome. Limitations of the evidence were the quality of the studies and the use of heterogeneous outcome measures, applied statistical methods and instruments used to assess work participation.ConclusionWe recommend applying the EULAR points to consider for designing, analysing and reporting on work participation in inflammatory arthritis also to SLE studies on work participation, to enhance the quality and comparability between studies and to better understand the impact of SLE on work participation.Trial registrationregistration in PROSPERO (CRD42020161275; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=161275).

Project description:Numerous studies have detailed the physical health benefits of children's participation in sport and a growing body of research also highlights the benefits for mental health. Children who participate in sport have also been shown to be advantaged academically. However, despite the benefits there is evidence that children are leading increasingly sedentary lifestyles and are at greater risk of chronic disease than those with active lifestyles. Sport provides an important means for children to achieve their recommended amount of daily physical activity. This systematic review asks 'what are those barriers to children's participation in sport?'Literature searches were carried out in June 2015 using; EMBASE, Medline, CINAHL and SportDiscus using the search terms barrier*, stop*, prevent*, participat*, taking part, Sports/, sport*, "physical education", PE, child*, young person*, adolescen*. These were supplemented with hand searches. A total of 3434 records were identified of which 22 were suitable for inclusion in the review, two additional studies were identified from Google Scholar in November 2016. Both qualitative and quantitative studies were included. Study's included in the review assessed children up to 18 years of age. Study quality was assessed using Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) tools.Studies took place in the school environment (n = 14), sports club (n = 1), community setting (n = 8) and adolescent care setting (n = 1). Frequently reported barriers across quantitative studies were 'time' (n = 4), 'cost' (n = 3), 'opportunity/accessibility' (n = 3) and 'friends' (n = 2). Frequently reported barriers across qualitative studies were 'time' (n = 6), 'cost' (n = 5), 'not being good at sport' (n = 6) and 'fear of being judged/embarrassed' (n = 6).Policy makers, parents and teachers should all be aware that 'cost' and 'time' are key barriers to participation in sport. More local sports opportunities are needed where costs are reduced. Schools and local clubs could better work together to provide more affordable local opportunities to increase children's participation in sport.

Dataset Information

Systematic review to determine whether participation in a trial influences outcome.

Objective

Data sources

Review methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Systematic review to determine whether participation in a trial influences outcome.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets