MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2335213851 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.140717

Arthritis Clinical Trials at a Crossroad

2015· editorial· en· W2335213851 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Janet Pope, Carter Thorne, Boulos Haraoui, Jacob Karsh, Edward Keystone, LINDA BENNETT

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2015
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical Methods
Canadian institutionsSouthlake Regional Health CenterUniversity of OttawaUniversity of TorontoSt Joseph's Health CareMount Sinai HospitalStructural Genomics ConsortiumWestern University
FundersCoastal Response Research Center, University of New Hampshire
KeywordsMedicineClinical trialAlternative medicinePopulationClinical researchIntensive care medicineInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With more than a century of combined trial experience, we discuss the demise of pharmaceutical company inflammatory arthritis clinical trials, speaking from our experience in Canada while potentially generalizing to the United States, Western Europe, and other regions where patients have reasonable access to medical care and therapeutics. The purpose of this editorial is 2-fold: to raise awareness of the critical state of rheumatology clinical trials in Canada; and to describe the increasingly insurmountable barriers facing trialists because of difficulty recruiting owing to trial designs (some requiring substandard care for participation); recent changes in trial operations and management; and the financial burden placed on trialists. The challenges are not unique to rheumatology1,2. Many industry-funded trials are not feasible. This can shift investigators to conducting non-pharmaceutical trials to answer challenging important questions, but the trials are usually extremely underfunded, creating a barrier to participation. Traditionally, clinical research has been the only means whereby advances in medicine can be translated into excellent patient care. Trial participation facilitates greater acceptance of innovative treatments and the integration of successful treatments into optimal care. There is no replacement for phase II and III clinical trial experience: Clinical trialists are early adopters and comfortable prescribers of new therapies once they are approved because they have acquired invaluable experience of novel products. In contrast, current trials are mostly bureaucratic and time-consuming to initiate and conduct, and they do not reflect the population studied. In fact, clinical research is becoming increasingly onerous with respect to regulatory and administrative requirements and is very expensive (in people and time resources) while, simultaneously, recruitment has dwindled (years ago, sites could enroll 10 subjects in a study vs 0 to 4 per study today). Thus, incurred costs are not recovered. Moreover, recruitment is limited by trial designs that … Address correspondence to Dr. J.E. Pope, 268 Grosvenor St., London, Ontario N6A 4V2, Canada. E-mail: janet.pope{at}sjhc.london.on.ca

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.049
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.352
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0490.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.099
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.336 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of RheumatologySame topicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical MethodsFrench-language works237,207