Adaptive design methods in dialysis clinical trials – a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Adaptive design methods are intended to improve efficiency of clinical trials and are relevant to evaluating interventions in dialysis populations. We sought to quantify the use of adaptive designs in dialysis clinical trials. Methods We completed a full text systematic review and adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Our review utilised a machine learning classifier and a novel full text systematic review method. We searched MEDLINE (Pubmed) and performed a detailed data extraction of trial characteristics and a completed a narrative synthesis of the data. Results 50 studies, available as 66 articles, were included after full text review. 31 studies were conducted in a dialysis population and 19 studies had renal replacement therapy as a primary or secondary outcome. While the absolute number of adaptive design methods is increasing over time, the relative use of adaptive design methods in dialysis trials is decreasing over time (6.1% in 2009 to 0.3% in 2019). Adaptive design methods impacted 52% of dialysis trials they were used in. Group sequential designs were the most common type of adaptive design method used. Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) was studied in 27 trails (54%), End Stage Kidney Disease (ESKD) was studied in 22 trials (44%) and Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) was studied in 1 trial (2%). 26 studies (52%) were supported by public funding. 41 studies (82%) did not report their adaptive design method in the title or abstract and would not be detected by a standard systematic. Conclusions Adaptive design methods are employed in dialysis trials, but there has been a decline in their relative use over time. Registration Number PROSPERO: CRD42020163946 Significance statement What was previously known about the specific topic of the manuscript? The use of adaptive designs methods in dialysis trials is unquantified. What were the most important findings? If studies are animals, this should be specified Although absolute numbers of adaptive design trials have increased over time, the proportion of dialysis trials using an adaptive design has reduced. Among trials that employed an adaptive design, 52% of dialysis trials were revised due to the adaptive criteria. Group sequential designs were the most common type of adaptive design method used in dialysis randomized clinical trials. Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) was studied in 54% of trials and End Stage Kidney Disease (ESKD) was studied in 44% of trials, which used an adaptive design. How does the new information advance a new understanding of the kidney and its diseases? Adaptive design methods are effective in dialysis trials, but their relative use has declined over time.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.442 | 0.955 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.058 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".