Selected article for: "design effect and sample size"
Author: Honarmand, Kimia; Penn, Jeremy; Agarwal, Arnav; Siemieniuk, Reed; Brignardello-Petersen, Romina; Bartoszko, Jessica J.; Zeraatkar, Dena; Agoritsas, Thomas; Burns, Karen; Fernando, Shannon M.; Foroutan, Farid; Ge, Long; Lamontagne, Francois; Jimenez-Mora, Mario A.; Murthy, Srinivas; Yepes-Nuñez, Juan Jose; Vandvik, Per O.; Ye, Zhikang; Rochwerg, Bram
Title: Clinical Trials in COVID-19 Management & Prevention: A Meta-epidemiological Study examining
  • Cord-id: bt99gq1s
  • Document date: 2021_7_15
    • ID: bt99gq1s
    Snippet: OBJECTIVE: To describe the characteristics of Covid-19 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and examine the association between trial characteristics and the likelihood of finding a significant effect. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a systematic review to identify RCTs (up to October 21, 2020) evaluating drugs or blood products to treat or prevent Covid-19. We extracted trial characteristics (number of centres, funding sources, and sample size) and assessed risk of bias (RoB) using the Cochrane RoB 2.0
    Document: OBJECTIVE: To describe the characteristics of Covid-19 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and examine the association between trial characteristics and the likelihood of finding a significant effect. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a systematic review to identify RCTs (up to October 21, 2020) evaluating drugs or blood products to treat or prevent Covid-19. We extracted trial characteristics (number of centres, funding sources, and sample size) and assessed risk of bias (RoB) using the Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool. We performed logistic regressions to evaluate the association between RoB due to randomization, single vs. multicentre, funding source, and sample size, and finding a statistically significant effect. RESULTS: We included 91 RCTs (n=46,802); 40 (44%) were single-centre, 23 (25.3%) enrolled <50 patients, 28 (30.8%) received industry funding, and 75 (82.4%) had high or probably high RoB. Thirty-eight trials (41.8%) reported a statistically significant effect. RoB due to randomization and being a single-centre trial were associated with increased odds of finding a statistically significant effect. CONCLUSIONS: There is high variability in RoB among Covid-19 trials. Researchers, funders, and knowledge-users should be cognizant of the impact of RoB due to randomization and single-centre trial status in designing, evaluating, and interpreting the results of RCTs. REGISTRATION: CRD42020192095

    Search related documents:
    Co phrase search for related documents
    • abstract screen and low quality: 1, 2
    • abstract screen and low quality evidence: 1
    • abstract screen title and acute respiratory syndrome: 1, 2
    • abstract screen title and low quality: 1, 2
    • abstract screen title and low quality evidence: 1
    • abstract title and acute respiratory syndrome: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
    • abstract title and logistic regression: 1, 2, 3, 4
    • abstract title and low quality: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15
    • abstract title and low quality evidence: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
    • abstract title and low quality research: 1
    • abstract title and machine learning: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
    • abstract title duplicate and low quality: 1
    • abstract title duplicate and low quality evidence: 1
    • abstract title duplicate independently and low quality: 1
    • abstract title duplicate independently and low quality evidence: 1
    • academic institution and acute respiratory syndrome: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
    • academic institution and logistic regression: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14
    • academic institution and low quality: 1, 2
    • academic institutional and acute respiratory syndrome: 1, 2