William B Feldman1, Anthony S Kim2, Winston Chiong2. 1. From the Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA (W.B.F.); Department of Neurology, Weill Institute for Neurosciences, University of California, San Francisco (A.S.K, W.C.); and the University of California, San Francisco Memory and Aging Center (W.C.). wbfeldman@partners.org. 2. From the Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA (W.B.F.); Department of Neurology, Weill Institute for Neurosciences, University of California, San Francisco (A.S.K, W.C.); and the University of California, San Francisco Memory and Aging Center (W.C.).
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Slow recruitment in acute stroke trials hampers the evaluation of new therapies and delays the adoption of effective therapies into clinical practice. This systematic review evaluates whether recruitment efficiency and rates have increased in acute stroke trials from 1990 to 2014. METHODS: Acute stroke trials from 2010 to 2014 were identified by a search of PubMed, Medline, the Cochrane Database of Research in Stroke, and the Stroke Trials Registry. These trials were compared to a previously published data set of trials conducted from 1990 to 2004. RESULTS: The median recruitment efficiency of trials from 1990 to 2004 was 0.41 participants/site/month compared with 0.26 participants/site/month from 2010 to 2014 (P=0.14). The median recruitment rate of trials from 1990 to 2004 was 26.8 participants/month compared with 19.0 participants/month from 2010 to 2014 (P=0.13). CONCLUSIONS: For acute stroke trials, neither recruitment efficiency nor recruitment rates have increased over the past 25 years and, if anything, have declined.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Slow recruitment in acute stroke trials hampers the evaluation of new therapies and delays the adoption of effective therapies into clinical practice. This systematic review evaluates whether recruitment efficiency and rates have increased in acute stroke trials from 1990 to 2014. METHODS:Acute stroke trials from 2010 to 2014 were identified by a search of PubMed, Medline, the Cochrane Database of Research in Stroke, and the Stroke Trials Registry. These trials were compared to a previously published data set of trials conducted from 1990 to 2004. RESULTS: The median recruitment efficiency of trials from 1990 to 2004 was 0.41 participants/site/month compared with 0.26 participants/site/month from 2010 to 2014 (P=0.14). The median recruitment rate of trials from 1990 to 2004 was 26.8 participants/month compared with 19.0 participants/month from 2010 to 2014 (P=0.13). CONCLUSIONS: For acute stroke trials, neither recruitment efficiency nor recruitment rates have increased over the past 25 years and, if anything, have declined.
Authors: Martin Ebinger; Benjamin Winter; Matthias Wendt; Joachim E Weber; Carolin Waldschmidt; Michal Rozanski; Alexander Kunz; Peter Koch; Philipp A Kellner; Daniel Gierhake; Kersten Villringer; Jochen B Fiebach; Ulrike Grittner; Andreas Hartmann; Bruno-Marcel Mackert; Matthias Endres; Heinrich J Audebert Journal: JAMA Date: 2014 Apr 23-30 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: S E Kasner; A Del Giudice; S Rosenberg; M Sheen; J M Luciano; B L Cucchiara; S R Messé; L H Sansing; J M Baren Journal: Neurology Date: 2009-05-12 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: William B Feldman; Anthony S Kim; S Andrew Josephson; Daniel H Lowenstein; Winston Chiong Journal: Neurology Date: 2016-03-23 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Alison M McDonald; Rosemary C Knight; Marion K Campbell; Vikki A Entwistle; Adrian M Grant; Jonathan A Cook; Diana R Elbourne; David Francis; Jo Garcia; Ian Roberts; Claire Snowdon Journal: Trials Date: 2006-04-07 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Shaun Treweek; Pauline Lockhart; Marie Pitkethly; Jonathan A Cook; Monica Kjeldstrøm; Marit Johansen; Taina K Taskila; Frank M Sullivan; Sue Wilson; Catherine Jackson; Ritu Jones; Elizabeth D Mitchell Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2013-02-07 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Merit Cudkowicz; Marianne K Chase; Christopher S Coffey; Dixie J Ecklund; Brenda J Thornell; Codrin Lungu; Katy Mahoney; Laurie Gutmann; Jeremy M Shefner; Kevin J Staley; Michael Bosch; Eric Foster; Jeffrey D Long; Emine O Bayman; James Torner; Jon Yankey; Richard Peters; Trevis Huff; Robin A Conwit; Shlomo Shinnar; Donna Patch; Basil T Darras; Audrey Ellis; Roger J Packer; Karen S Marder; Claudia A Chiriboga; Claire Henchcliffe; Joyce Ann Moran; Blagovest Nikolov; Stewart A Factor; Carole Seeley; Steven M Greenberg; Anthony A Amato; Sara DeGregorio; Tanya Simuni; Tina Ward; John T Kissel; Stephen J Kolb; Amy Bartlett; Joseph F Quinn; Kellie Keith; Steven R Levine; Nadege Gilles; Patricia K Coyle; Jessica Lamb; Gil I Wolfe; Annemarie Crumlish; Luis Mejico; Muhammad Maaz Iqbal; James D Bowen; Caryl Tongco; Louis B Nabors; Khurram Bashir; Melanie Benge; Craig M McDonald; Erik K Henricson; Björn Oskarsson; Bruce H Dobkin; Catherine Canamar; Tracy A Glauser; Daniel Woo; Angela Molloy; Peggy Clark; Timothy L Vollmer; Alexander J Stein; Richard J Barohn; Mazen M Dimachkie; Jean-Baptiste Le Pichon; Michael G Benatar; Julie Steele; Lawrence Wechsler; Paula R Clemens; Christine Amity; Robert G Holloway; Christine Annis; Mark P Goldberg; Mariam Andersen; Susan T Iannaccone; A Gordon Smith; J Robinson Singleton; Mariana Doudova; E Clarke Haley; Mark S Quigg; Stephanie Lowenhaupt; Beth A Malow; Karen Adkins; David B Clifford; Mengesha A Teshome; Noreen Connolly Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2020-06-01 Impact factor: 18.302