Conflicts could especially appear in relation to data transparency for multiregional trials, for example, trials with recruiting centres in the EU and the United States, where these trials would be relevant for licensing in both regions.
To encourage a proactive approach to trial retention, strategies can be designed to target participants directly through letters, emails, telephone calls or to target them via the clinicians involved in participant follow-up, for example, through regular communication with trial sites.
Although these results are encouraging, this topic would need further investigation, for example, with randomized clinical trials and a larger sample size.
This number of trials could be considered an advantage in terms of generalisability, but could also be seen as a limitation as it was not possible to say with any confidence if there were differences in patients' decisions between studies, as a result of factors within the trials themselves, for example trials with very different arms where patients may have a preference.
For example, a trial with a control arm mortality of 30% and a experimental arm mortality of 25% would result in an ARR = 5% and a RRR = 16%.
For example, a trial with seven baseline and follow-up measures would require 10% fewer patients than a trial with four of each type of measure where pre, post and mix are 0.7, 0.7, and 0.5.
For example, one trial with inappropriate NNT calculation presented a number needed to treat of 39 which is nearly the same as the correct result of 38.2 obtained by the appropriate method proposed by Altman & Andersen [ 14].
For example, a trial with the minimum RT of 700 ms would lead to an epoch consisting of 700 ms (time until response) and 1500-ms feedback of the chosen reward.
For example, a trial with less than 100 subjects per arm would have high power to establish that early extubation did not negatively impact MRS (assuming the largest acceptable difference in MRS was 0.75 points and early extubation did not increase the mean MRS by more than 0.50 points) and shortened ICU length of stay.
Participants were first familiarized with the stimuli by viewing example trials with 1600 points and rotation speed of 0.5 rotations/s (corresponding to motion speed of 8.2 12°/s), parameters that provided easy recognition of the objects for all the patients (Fig. 2, 1600pnt condition), and reported verbally whether they saw a sphere or cylinder.
