Cited by 107Statistical Methods in Clinical TrialsPharmaceutical studies and practicesMeta-analysis and systematic reviews

Adaptive designs undertaken in clinical research: a review of registered clinical trials

Open access
Hatfield, Isabella, Allison, Annabel, Flight, Laura, Julious, Steven A., Dimairo, Munyaradzi·2016·Trials

Abstract

Adaptive designs have the potential to improve efficiency in the evaluation of new medical treatments in comparison to traditional fixed sample size designs. However, they are still not widely used in practice in clinical research. Little research has been conducted to investigate what adaptive designs are being undertaken. This review highlights the current state of registered adaptive designs and their characteristics. The review looked at phase II, II/III and III trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov from 29 February 2000 to 1 June 2014, supplemented with trials from the National Institute for Health Research register and known adaptive trials. A range of adaptive design search terms were applied to the trials extracted from each database. Characteristics of the adaptive designs were then recorded including funder, therapeutic area and type of adaptation. The results in the paper suggest that the use of adaptive designs has increased. They seem to be most often used in phase II trials and in oncology. In phase III trials, the most popular form of adaptation is the group sequential design. The review failed to capture all trials with adaptive designs, which suggests that the reporting of adaptive designs, such as in clinical trials registers, needs much improving. We recommend that clinical trial registers should contain sections dedicated to the type and scope of the adaptation and that the term 'adaptive design' should be included in the trial title or at least in the brief summary or design sections.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s13063-016-1273-9

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 38 · Cited by 107

Authors
Hatfield, I., Allison, A., Flight, L., Julious, S. A., & Dimairo, M.
Affiliations
  • Newcastle University (GB)
  • MRC Biostatistics Unit (GB)
  • University of Sheffield (GB)
Corresponding author
Dimairo, Munyaradzi
Venue
Trials
Published
2016-03-19
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
150-150
ISSN
1745-6215 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2301701445
Cited by
107
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 2
FWCI
1.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Trials (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR-RMFI-2013-04-011-101, DRF-2012-05-182)
  • University of Sheffield
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pharmaceutical studies and practices
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Keywords
adaptive design, ClinicalTrials.gov, group sequential designs, cancer clinical trials
MeSH terms
Clinical Trials as Topic, Data Collection, Humans, Terminology as Topic, Quality Control, Registries, Research Design

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