ArticleArchives of internal medicine2008
Better outcomes for patients treated at hospitals that participate in clinical trials.
Article in Archives of internal medicine, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 55 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial to Assess Feasibility, Safety, and Efficacy of Rapid, Simultaneous Therapy Initiation in Chronic Kidney Disease and Type 2 Diabetes: RAPID-CKD
IC PaIN Trial: Interstitial Cystitis Pain Improvement With Naltrexone, the Effect of Low Dose Naltrexone on Symptoms and Pain of Patients With Interstitial Cystitis/Painful Bladder Syndrome a Randomized Placebo-controlled Prospective Trial
Who cites it
55 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- If health organisations and staff engage in research, does healthcare improve? Strengthening the evidence base through systematic reviews.Health research policy and systems · 2024Pooled it
- The value of allied health professional research engagement on healthcare performance: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2023Pooled it
- A qualitative systematic review and thematic synthesis exploring the impacts of clinical academic activity by healthcare professionals outside medicine.BMC health services research · 2021Pooled it
- Does the engagement of clinicians and organisations in research improve healthcare performance: a three-stage review.BMJ open · 2015Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Comparison of outcomes between Hodgkin's lymphoma patients treated in and outside clinical trials: A study based on the EORTC-Dutch late effects cohort-linked data.European journal of haematology · 2023Trial
- Enhancing Trial Delivery in Parkinson's Disease: Qualitative Insights from PD STAT.Journal of Parkinson's disease · 2022Trial
- The unspoken benefit of participation in a clinical trial.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2021Trial
- The National Institute for Health Research Hyperacute Stroke Research Centres and the ENCHANTED trial: the impact of enhanced research infrastructure on trial metrics and patient outcomes.Health research policy and systems · 2019Trial
- Vulnerability and Pediatric Pain.Paediatric & neonatal pain · 2026Article
- An Early Trial-Based Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy for Diabetes Related Foot Ulcer Healing.International wound journal · 2026Article
- Establishing a Research Institute in an Ontario Community Hospital: Reflections and Lessons Learned.Healthcare management forum · 2026Article
- Learning from COVID-19: clinical trials, health information technology, and patient mortality.npj health systems · 2025Article
- Development of lactation and breast/chestfeeding adverse event terminology (LaBAET) through a Delphi consensus approach.International breastfeeding journal · 2025Article
- Measuring Representativeness in Clinical Trials.Circulation · 2025Review
- "Developing a manual clinical trials screening process in a diverse southern gynecologic oncology practice".Gynecologic oncology reports · 2025Article
- Developing a toolkit for building a community hospital clinical research program.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2024Article
- Factors influencing community intensive care unit research participation: a qualitative descriptive study.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2024Article
- The research activities of Ontario's large community hospitals: an updated scoping review.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Cancer research provides a model for advancing clinical trials in dementia in the era of disease-modifying Alzheimer's-type dementia therapies.Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBarriers to institutions participating in clinical trials include concerns about harms and costs. However, we hypothesized that patients treated at hospitals participating in trials would have better outcomes than patients treated at nonparticipating hospitals. We tested this hypothesis in 494 CRUSADE (Can Rapid Risk Stratification of Unstable Angina Patients Suppress Adverse Outcomes With Early Implementation of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines) hospitals treating 174 062 patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome.
methodsHospitals were classified into tertiles by percentage of patients concurrently enrolled in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome trials. Outcomes were use of composite guideline-indicated care and in-hospital mortality. Multivariate regression was used to examine the association between hospital trial participation and outcomes.
resultsOverall, 4590 patients (2.6%) were enrolled in trials, ranging from 0% (145 hospitals) to low-enrollment tertile (1.0%; interquartile range [IQR], 0.5%-1.4%; n=226) to high-enrollment tertile (4.9%; IQR, 3.5%-9.7%; n=123). The composite guideline adherence score increased with increasing tertiles of trial participation: 76.9% (IQR, 71.8%-81.3%) vs 78.3% (IQR, 73.2%-82.4%) vs 81.1% (IQR, 76.2%-84.1%) (adjusted P= .008). Hospitals that participated in trials had higher adjusted guideline adherence than nonparticipating hospitals (low enrollment, 0.8% greater [95% confidence interval {CI}, -0.9% to 2.6%]; and high enrollment, 2.5% greater [95% CI, 0.5%-4.5%]). In-hospital mortality decreased with increasing trial participation: 5.9% vs 4.4% vs 3.5% (adjusted P= .003). Patients treated at hospitals that participated in trials had significantly lower mortality than patients treated at nonparticipating hospitals (low enrollment adjusted odds, 0.9 [95% CI, 0.8-1.0]; and high enrollment adjusted odds, 0.8 [95% CI, 0.7-0.9]).
conclusionsThe CRUSADE hospitals enrolled less than 3% of their patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome into trials, and one-third never participated in trials. Compared with hospitals that do not participate in trials, those hospitals that do participate in trials seem to provide better care and to have lower mortality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
18362259What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.