Back
PROTOCOL: Are clinical trial participants informed about potential benefits and harms? A comparison of informed consent materials and trial protocols
Paludan-Mueller, A. S.; Joergensen, K. J.; Goetzsche, P. C.
2020-05-22
medical ethics
10.1101/2020.05.18.20100917
medRxiv
Show abstract
This is a protocol for the project entitled: "Are clinical trial participants informed about potential benefits and harms? A comparison of informed consent materials and trial protocols."
Matching journals
●Non-profit
◐University press
○Commercial
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
1
PLOS ONE
●
5266 papers in training set
Top 4%
31.1%
Similar papers in this journal
- Using numerical modelling and simulation to assess the ethical burden in clinical trials and how it relates to the proportion of responders in a trial sample 94%
- Exploring scalable assessment methods for terminated trials in ClinicalTrials.gov: A cohort analysis of German and Californian trials 94%
- Analysis of clinical trial registry entry histories using the novel R package cthist 93%
2
BMJ Open
●
601 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
26.6%
Similar papers in this journal
- Comparison of preprints and final journal publications from COVID-19 Studies: Discrepancies in results reporting and spin in interpretation 93%
- Reporting of Retrospective Registration in Clinical Trial Publications 93%
- Protocol for the development of a tool (INSPECT-SR) to identify problematic randomised controlled trials in systematic reviews of health interventions 92%
50% of probability mass above
3
Trials
○
29 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
5.5%
Similar papers in this journal
- Development of a consensus extension of the estimands framework for cluster randomised trials (CRT-estimands): results from an international Delphi study 94%
- Supporting Reanalysis and Reuse of Clinical Trial Data: A Case Study 93%
- Trials that turn from retrospectively registered to prospectively registered: A cohort study of ‘retroactively prospective’ clinical trial registration using history data 93%
4
BMC Medical Research Methodology
○
47 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.0%
Similar papers in this journal
- Approaches in Analyzing Predictors of Trial Failure: A Scoping Review and Meta-epidemiological study 93%
- Development, validation, and usage of metrics to evaluate clinical research hypothesis quality 93%
- Investigator-initiated versus industry-sponsored trials – Visibility and relevance of randomized controlled trials in clinical practice guidelines (IMPACT) 93%
5
JMIR Formative Research
◐
33 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.2%
Similar papers in this journal
- The Validity of the Parsley Symptom Index: an e-PROM designed for Telehealth 90%
- Applications and barriers to use of an mHealth iPhone application for self-management of chronic recurrent medical conditions: A Pilot Study 90%
- Evaluating the Clinical Feasibility of an Artificial Intelligence-Powered Clinical Decision Support System: A Longitudinal Feasibility Study 89%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.