ArticleClinical epidemiology2026
Logistical Challenges in Platform Randomized Trials - Operational Realities That Curb the Promise of Efficiency.
Article in Clinical epidemiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Platform randomized trials offer a flexible framework for evaluating multiple therapies within a shared long-term infrastructure, yet their implementation poses substantial logistical and operational challenges. This paper examines three interrelated features that frequently determine the feasibility and efficiency of platform trials: 1) infrastructure and setup costs; 2) training, site management, and partial center participation; and 3) adapting to changing clinical practice and diagnostic criteria. While platform designs are often promoted for their efficiency, the establishment and maintenance of long-term infrastructure require greater upfront investment, more complex governance structures, and ongoing retraining compared to conventional randomized trials. Site heterogeneity and partial participation can create inconsistencies in implementation, data quality, and recruitment momentum. Over the long term, evolving standards of care and diagnostic definitions further complicate cross-arm comparability and risk introducing time-confounding. Rather than assuming platform trials are inherently more efficient, we argue that their success depends on sustained resourcing, harmonization efforts, sustained dedication from trial sites, and a robust training infrastructure. To address these challenges, we describe a trial-to-platform approach: a phased strategy in which a conventional multicenter trial is launched with modular, expandable systems that can later evolve to a platform trial. This approach allows for early learning, milestone-based funding, harmonization before full expansion, thereby reducing cost inefficiency and operational drift. Practical recommendations are provided for funders and trialists on how to structure, resource, and govern platforms to ensure scalability, reproducibility, and long-term sustainability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.