What's New in Stroke? Phase III Randomized Clinical Trials of 2012–2014
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Randomized clinical trials provide the most reliable evidence to guide the management of stroke and threatened stroke and reflect the interests of the stroke research community. The spectrum of phase III randomized clinical trials in stroke has not been previously characterized. METHODS: Phase III stroke randomized clinical trials published between 2012 and 2014 were identified by search of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials supplemented by recent publications known to the co-authors. RESULTS: Thirty-four randomized clinical trials were included involving 85 770 participants: 20 acute stroke randomized clinical trials (32 590 patients), 11 stroke prevention randomized clinical trials (28 964 patients), and three randomized clinical trials in which stroke was a major component of a composite primary outcome involving nonstroke patients (24 216 patients). Twenty-two (65%) trials were international, and eight (24%) were industry sponsored. Drugs were tested in 21 (62%) randomized clinical trials, with devices (n = 9), surgery (n = 3), and diet (n = 1) in the remainder. Thirteen (38%) randomized clinical trials were stopped early: seven for futility, three for efficacy, two for harm, and one for budget/administrative reasons. Overall, the results of seven (21%) randomized clinical trials were positive, five (15%) equivocal, 18 (53%) negative, and four (12%) inconclusive. Considering positive and definitively negative randomized clinical trials testing currently used interventions, 11 (32%) randomized clinical trials have direct implications for clinical management. CONCLUSIONS: The diversity of interventions, high-quality, and worldwide origins of recently published phase III randomized clinical trials reflects a vibrant international stroke research community. The current generation of stroke randomized clinical trials provides important guidance for stroke prevention and acute stroke care.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.176 | 0.317 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".