↓ Skip to main content

Specific barriers to the conduct of randomised clinical trials on medical devices

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
31 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
67 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
120 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Specific barriers to the conduct of randomised clinical trials on medical devices
Published in
Trials, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13063-017-2168-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Edmund A. M. Neugebauer, Ana Rath, Sunya-Lee Antoine, Michaela Eikermann, Doerthe Seidel, Carsten Koenen, Esther Jacobs, Dawid Pieper, Martine Laville, Séverine Pitel, Cecilia Martinho, Snezana Djurisic, Jacques Demotes-Mainard, Christine Kubiak, Vittorio Bertele, Janus C. Jakobsen, Silvio Garattini, Christian Gluud

Abstract

Medical devices play an important role in the diagnosis, prevention, treatment and care of diseases. However, compared to pharmaceuticals, there is no rigorous formal regulation for demonstration of benefits and exclusion of harms to patients. The medical device industry argues that the classical evidence hierarchy cannot be applied for medical devices, as randomised clinical trials are impossible to perform. This article aims to identify the barriers for randomised clinical trials on medical devices. Systematic literature searches without meta-analysis and internal European Clinical Research Infrastructure Network (ECRIN) communications taking place during face-to-face meetings and telephone conferences from 2013 to 2017 within the context of the ECRIN Integrating Activity (ECRIN-IA) project. In addition to the barriers that exist for all trials, we identified three major barriers for randomised clinical trials on medical devices, namely: (1) randomisation, including timing of assessment, acceptability, blinding, choice of the comparator group and considerations on the learning curve; (2) difficulties in determining appropriate outcomes; and (3) the lack of scientific advice, regulations and transparency. The present review offers potential solutions to break down the barriers identified, and argues for applying the randomised clinical trial design when assessing the benefits and harms of medical devices.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 31 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 120 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 22 18%
Student > Bachelor 18 15%
Student > Master 14 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 12%
Other 9 8%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 27 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 23%
Engineering 15 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Other 29 24%
Unknown 32 27%