Evidence mapPaperPMID 42318774Full record

ReviewExperimental physiology2026

Digital N-of-1 trials and their application in experimental physiology.

Stefan Konigorski, Mathias Ried-Larsen, Christopher H Schmid

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Experimental physiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Stefan KonigorskiHasso Plattner Institute for Digital Engineering, Potsdam, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9966-6819
Mathias Ried-LarsenThe Centre of Inflammation and Metabolism and the Centre for Physical Activity Research, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Christopher H SchmidDepartment of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0855-5313

Funding

The Centre for Physical Activity ResearchTrygFonden
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Traditionally, studies in experimental physiology have been conducted in small groups of human participants, animal models or cell lines. Identifying optimal study designs that achieve sufficient power for drawing proper statistical inferences to detect group level effects with small sample sizes has been challenging. Moreover, average effects derived from traditional group-level inference do not necessarily apply to individual participants. Here, we introduce N-of-1 trials as an innovative study design that can be used to draw valid statistical inference about the effects of interventions on individual participants and can be aggregated across multiple study participants to provide population-level inferences more efficiently than standard group randomized trials. N-of-1 trials have been used in healthcare settings since the late 1980s, but without large-scale adoption and with few applications in experimental physiology research settings. In this paper, we introduce the key components and design features of N-of-1 trials, describe statistical analysis and interpretations of the results, and describe some available digital tools to facilitate their use using examples from experimental physiology.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicPhysiologyResearch DesignAnimalsHumansSample SizeN‐of‐1 trialspersonalized medicineprecision medicinesingle‐case experimental design

Identifiers

PMID42318774
PMCPMC13394772

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.