The DOI matches its Crossref record; 83 of the 83 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Systematic review on costs and resource use of randomized clinical trials shows a lack of transparent and comprehensive data
Abstract
Objectives Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are costly. We aimed to provide a systematic overview of the available evidence on resource use and costs for RCTs to support budget planning.Study design and setting We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and HealthSTAR from inception until November 30, 2016 without language restrictions. We included any publication reporting empirical data on resource use and costs of RCTs and categorized them depending on whether they reported (i) resource and costs of all aspects at all study stages of an RCT (including conception, planning, preparation, conduct, and all tasks after the last patient has completed the RCT); (ii) on several aspects, (iii) on a single aspect (e.g., recruitment); or (iv) on overall costs for RCTs. Median costs of different recruitment strategies were calculated. Other results (e.g., overall costs) were listed descriptively. All cost data were converted into USD 2017.Results A total of 56 articles that reported on cost or resource use of RCTs were included. None of the articles provided empirical resource use and cost data for all aspects of an entire RCT. Eight articles presented resource use and cost data on several aspects (e.g., aggregated cost data of different drug development phases, site-specific costs, selected cost components). Thirty-five articles assessed costs of one specific aspect of an RCT (i.e., 30 on recruitment; five others). The median costs per recruited patient were USD 409 (range: USD 41-6,990). Overall costs of an RCT, as provided in 16 articles, ranged from USD 43-103,254 per patient, and USD 0.2-611.5 Mio per RCT but the methodology of gathering these overall estimates remained unclear in 12 out of 16 articles (75%).Conclusion The usefulness of the available empirical evidence on resource use and costs of RCTs is limited. Transparent and comprehensive resource use and cost data are urgently needed to support budget planning for RCTs and help improve sustainability.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“A randomised trial requires considerable funding, typically from drug or device companies (ie, industry funded) or from scientific or private foundations, or governmental or non-governmental organisations (ie, non-industry funded).102”
From SPIRIT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for protocols of randomised trials (2025) · cites this paper as [102]
Citations
Cites
The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development costs
DiMasi, J. A., Hansen, R. W., & Grabowski, H. G. (2003) · Journal of Health Economics · doi:10.1016/s0167-6296(02)00126-1 · Cited by 4,265
How to improve R&D productivity: the pharmaceutical industry's grand challenge
Paul, S. M., Mytelka, D. S., Dunwiddie, C. T., Persinger, C. C., Munos, B. H., Lindborg, S. R., & Schacht, A. L. (2010) · Nature Reviews Drug Discovery · doi:10.1038/nrd3078 · Cited by 3,566
Innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: New estimates of R&D costs
DiMasi, J. A., Grabowski, H. G., & Hansen, R. W. (2016) · Journal of Health Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jhealeco.2016.01.012 · Cited by 3,359
Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial
Michel, D. (1982) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.1982.03330120023025 · Cited by 2,211
Increasing value and reducing waste in research design, conduct, and analysis
Ioannidis, J. P. A., Greenland, S., Hlatky, M. A., Khoury, M. J., Macleod, M. R., Moher, D., Schulz, K. F., & Tibshirani, R. (2014) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(13)62227-8 · Cited by 1,597
How to increase value and reduce waste when research priorities are set
Chalmers, I., Bracken, M. B., Djulbegovic, B., Garattini, S., Grant, J., Gülmezoglu, A. M., Howells, D. W., Ioannidis, J. P. A., & Oliver, S. (2014) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(13)62229-1 · Cited by 1,436
Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research
Glasziou, P., Altman, D. G., Bossuyt, P., Boutron, I., Clarke, M., Julious, S., Michie, S., Moher, D., & Wager, E. (2014) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(13)62228-x · Cited by 1,319
Central challenges facing the national clinical research enterprise
Sung, N. S., Crowley, W. F., Genel, M., Salber, P., Sandy, L., Sherwood, L. M., Johnson, S. B., Catanese, V., Tilson, H., Getz, K., et al. (2003) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.289.10.1278 · Cited by 1,235
Estimating The Cost Of New Drug Development: Is It Really $802 Million?
Adams, C., & Brantner, V. V. (2006) · Health Affairs · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.25.2.420 · Cited by 917
Increasing value and reducing waste: addressing inaccessible research
Chan, A.-W., Song, F., Vickers, A., Jefferson, T., Dickersin, K., Gøtzsche, P. C., Krumholz, H. M., Ghersi, D., & van der Worp, H. B. (2014) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(13)62296-5 · Cited by 887
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Pharmacogenomics: current status and future perspectives
Pirmohamed, M. (2023) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/s41576-022-00572-8 · Cited by 390
CONSORT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for reporting randomised trials
Hopewell, S., Chan, A.-W., Collins, G. S., Hróbjartsson, A., Moher, D., Schulz, K. F., Tunn, R., Aggarwal, R., Berkwits, M., Berlin, J. A., et al. (2025) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj-2024-081124 · Cited by 205
SPIRIT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for protocols of randomised trials
Hróbjartsson, A., Boutron, I., Hopewell, S., Moher, D., Schulz, K. F., Collins, G. S., Tunn, R., Aggarwal, R., Berkwits, M., Berlin, J. A., et al. (2025) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj-2024-081660 · Cited by 171
Recruitment and retention strategies in mental health trials – A systematic review
Liu, Y., Pencheon, E., Hunter, R. M., Moncrieff, J., & Freemantle, N. (2018) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0203127 · Cited by 98
Generating comparative evidence on new drugs and devices after approval
Cipriani, A., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Rothwell, P. M., Glasziou, P., Li, T., Hernandez, A. F., Tomlinson, A., Simes, R. J., & Naci, H. (2020) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(19)33177-0 · Cited by 89
Metadata
- Authors
- Speich, B., von Niederhäusern, B., Schur, N., Hemkens, L. G., Fürst, T., Bhatnagar, N., Alturki, R., Agarwal, A., Kasenda, B., Pauli-Magnus, C., Schwenkglenks, M., & Briel, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Basel (CH)
- Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute (CH)
- McMaster University (CA)
- King Fahad Specialist Hospital (SA)
- University of Toronto (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Briel, Matthias
- ORCID
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-04
- Volume
- 96
- Pages
- 1-11
- ISSN
- 0895-4356 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2776980134
- Cited by
- 146
- References
- 83
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 2
- FWCI
- 0.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- edoc (University of Basel) (acceptedVersion)
- edoc (University of Basel) (submittedVersion)
- Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Health and Medical Research Impacts
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
- Keywords
- randomized controlled trials, trial costs, resource utilization (health care), cost transparency, budgeting
- MeSH terms
- Cost-Benefit Analysis, Humans, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Patient Selection, Disclosure
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review