Coming out soon
We have developed an AI tool called the Clinical Trial Risk Tool which allows a user to upload a trial protocol and which categorises the protocol as high, medium, or low risk of ending without delivering informative results.
When a pharmaceutical company develops a drug, it needs to pass through several phases of clinical trials before it can be approved by regulators.
Before the trial is run, the drug developer writes a document called a protocol. This contains key information about how long the trial will run for, what is the risk to participants, what kind of treatment is being investigated, etc.
The tool is open-source under MIT licence and it does not save any of your data.
Currently, professionals at a funding organisation read the protocols and perform a subjective assessment of the trial’s cost, complexity, and risk of ending uninformatively.
One of the most common causes of a trial ending uninformatively is underpowering. There are several indicators of high risk of uninformativeness which can be identified in a protocol, such as a lack of and or an inadequate statistical analysis plan, use of non-standard endpoints, or the use of cluster randomisation. Low-risk trials are often run by well-known institutions with external funding and an international or intercontinental array of sites. These indicators can be referred to as features or parameters.
If you would like to cite the tool alone, you can cite:
Wood TA and McNair D., Clinical Trial Risk Tool: software application using natural language processing to identify the risk of trial uninformativeness. Gates Open Res 2023, 7:56 doi: 10.12688/gatesopenres.14416.1.
A BibTeX entry for LaTeX users is
@article{Wood_2023,
doi = {10.12688/gatesopenres.14416.1},
url = {https://doi.org/10.12688%2Fgatesopenres.14416.1},
year = 2023,
month = {apr},
publisher = {F1000 Research Ltd},
volume = {7},
pages = {56},
author = {Thomas A Wood and Douglas McNair},
title = {Clinical Trial Risk Tool: software application using natural language processing to identify the risk of trial uninformativeness},
journal = {Gates Open Research}
}Blog
Guest post by Safeer Khan, Lecturer at Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Government College University, Lahore, Pakistan Multi-Arm & Multi-Stage (MAMS) Clinical Trials Design Tips The design of clinical trials is increasingly challenged by the Rising Costs, limited availability of eligible patient populations, and the growing demand for timely therapeutic evaluation. Traditional parallel-group designs, which typically compare a single intervention to a control, are often insufficient to meet these pressures in terms of speed, efficiency, and resource utilization.
You can use the t-test when you want to compare the means (averages) of continuous data between two groups, such as blood pressure or maximum concentration of a drug in urine (Cmax). If you have data with a dichotomous outcome, you can use the Chi-Squared test instead - please try our Chi-Squared sample size calculator. The calculator below will calculate the minimum sample size for you. Your expected effect size d is the standardised effect size according to Cohen’s definition.
You can use the Chi-Squared test to analyse your trial data or A/B test data if you have two groups with a dichotomous outcome. For example, you have two arms in your trial: the placebo and the intervention arm, and your endpoint is either yes or no, such as “did the subject experience an adverse event during the trial”. The calculator below will calculate the minimum sample size for you. Your expected effect size w is the standardised effect size according to Cohen’s definition.