Search PubMedSearch

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Pragmatic Clinical Trials as Topic”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

Pragmatic gynecologic cancer clinical trials: statements and roadmap from the Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup Chicago Brainstorming Meeting.

Randomized controlled trials remain fundamental to evidence generation in oncology but are increasingly complex, costly, and often misaligned with real-world practice. Traditional explanatory trials, designed under ideal, controlled conditions, frequently enroll highly selected populations, limiting generalizability and underrepresenting key groups such as older adults, patients with comorbidities, and those from low- and middle-income countries. Pragmatic clinical trials offer an alternative by evaluating interventions under routine care conditions, with broader eligibility, simplified procedures, and patient-centered outcomes. To address these challenges, the Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup convened an international brainstorming meeting in May 2025 with multi-disciplinary experts, patients, and advocates to define priorities and develop a roadmap for pragmatic trials in gynecologic oncology. Key discussions emphasized embedding trial design within routine care, aligning eligibility criteria and procedures with standard practice, minimizing non-essential data collection, and prioritizing outcomes meaningful to patients, including quality of life. Innovative designs such as registry-based randomized trials, trials-within-cohorts, and cluster randomization were highlighted as feasible approaches to improve efficiency while preserving internal validity. Integration of patient-reported outcomes and real-world data was considered achievable when carefully streamlined. Major challenges identified included regulatory heterogeneity, consent complexity, data interoperability, and funding limitations, particularly in multi-national settings. Proposed solutions include simplified consent models, centralized ethics processes, hybrid funding strategies, and the responsible use of artificial intelligence to enhance patient identification, recruitment, and potential development of synthetic control arms. Patient engagement was recognized as essential to ensure relevance, feasibility, and equity. Incorporation of patient-reported outcomes was discussed as key to informing acceptance and tolerability. In summary, pragmatic trials within Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup represent a critical pathway to generate efficient, inclusive, and practice-changing evidence in gynecologic cancers across diverse health care settings.

Humans

Effectiveness of a blended care intervention in physiotherapy with exercise and education for patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis (SmArt-E): A multicentre pragmatic randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a twelve-month smartphone-assisted physiotherapy (SmArt-E) intervention versus usual care in hip and/or knee osteoarthritis (OA), and to assess usability and patient satisfaction with the digital support. METHOD: We conducted a multicentre, pragmatic, parallel-group randomized controlled trial in 27 physiotherapy practices in Germany. Patients with physician-diagnosed hip and/or knee OA aged ≥50 (hip) or ≥38 years (knee) were randomly allocated to SmArt-E (IG; n=166) or usual care (CG; n=164). The twelve-month intervention combined supervised and smartphone-assisted training and education (blended care). Primary outcomes were pain (NRS, 0-10) and physical function (HOOS/KOOS-ADL, 0-100) at twelve months. Secondary outcomes followed OARSI domains; usability and patient satisfaction were also assessed. RESULTS: Among 330 participants (mean age 64±8 years), baseline NRS was 3.2±2.3 in the CG and 3.5±2.4 in the IG; HOOS/KOOS-ADL was 71.6±17.7 and 69.4±17.5, respectively. No significant between-group differences were found for pain (-0.36; 95% CI: -0.84 to 0.12; p=0.14) or physical function (2.66; 95% CI: -0.46 to 5.77; p=0.09). Among 13 secondary outcomes, significant differences favouring the IG emerged at three and twelve months for several domains; however, effect sizes were small and unlikely to be clinically meaningful. CONCLUSION: SmArt-E did not demonstrate superior effectiveness over usual care in mild hip and/or knee OA. Both groups improved over time, with slightly more favourable but clinically inconclusive outcomes in the IG. Findings highlight the need to refine the intervention, better identify eligible patients, and optimize digital and in-person components.

Humans

Closed-loop insulin delivery for glycaemic control in hospitalised and perioperative adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

We evaluated whether closed-loop insulin delivery improves glycaemic control in hospitalised and perioperative adults. PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to 29 June 2026 for randomised controlled trials comparing closed-loop or automated insulin delivery with usual care or conventional insulin therapy. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted; risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2 and certainty of evidence using GRADE. Seven trials involving 375 analysed participants were included. Closed-loop insulin delivery increased time in target glucose range by 23.91 percentage points (95% CI 19.40 to 28.43; I2 = 0%) and reduced mean glucose by 1.79 mmol/L (95% CI 1.06 to 2.53 lower; I2 = 36.3%); certainty was moderate for both outcomes. Two trials involving 69 participants reported compatible participant-level data for clinically significant hyperglycaemia, and both estimates favoured closed-loop insulin delivery, although the evidence was exploratory and imprecise. No severe hypoglycaemic events occurred in either group, precluding reliable estimation of comparative safety. Closed-loop insulin delivery may improve glycaemic process measures, but larger pragmatic trials are needed to establish clinical benefits, safety, and implementation feasibility.

Humans

Virtual Reality Education for Hospitalized Pediatric Patients Improves Intrinsic Motivation: A Prospective, Randomized Crossover Study.

Hospitalized children experience educational disruption and reduced motivation during prolonged admissions. Despite the availability of in-hospital schools, many cannot participate due to illness severity or isolation precautions. This pragmatic, randomized crossover trial evaluated whether bedside virtual reality (VR) lessons improve intrinsic motivation among inpatients aged 5 to 25 years unable to attend the hospital school. Participants completed both VR-based educational sessions and standard of care (SOC) conditions on consecutive days. The primary outcome was intrinsic motivation, with secondary outcomes including educational self-efficacy, well-being, self-esteem, and parental experience. Of 156 enrolled patients, 100 were analyzed (mean age 11.5 [SD = 4.1 years]; 43.9% female). Intrinsic motivation scores were higher in the VR condition than SOC (P = .0048), and parental satisfaction was also greater (P = .0008). Bedside VR education represents a feasible, acceptable, and scalable adjunct to inpatient learning, supporting intrinsic motivation and caregiver satisfaction during hospitalization.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05725395, date first registered November 22, 2022.

Humans

Electronic Nudges to Increase Influenza Vaccination in Immunosuppressed Adults Across the Age Spectrum: A Pooled Analysis of 2 Nationwide Randomized Trials.

BACKGROUND: Immunosuppressed individuals face higher risk of severe influenza complications, yet vaccination coverage remains low. We aimed to assess the effect of electronic letter-based nudges on influenza vaccination uptake by immunosuppression status. METHODS: We performed a participant-level pooled analysis of 2 methodologically harmonized, nationwide, pragmatic randomized clinical trials during the 2023-2024 influenza season. Adults aged &#x2265;65 years (NUDGE-FLU-2) and adults aged 18-64 years with chronic conditions (NUDGE-FLU-CHRONIC) were included, with immunosuppression defined by an immunosuppressive diagnosis or a filled prescription for immunosuppressive therapy. Participants were randomized in a 2.45:1:1:1:1:1:1 ratio to usual care or 1 of 6 electronic letter interventions. The primary outcome was receipt of influenza vaccination by 1 January 2024 ascertained from nationwide administrative health registries. Effect modification by immunosuppression status was assessed using binomial regression. RESULTS: Among 1 181 254 participants (mean age 67 years; 73 830 [6.3%] immunosuppressed), 66.1% were vaccinated. Any letter increased vaccine uptake compared with usual care (absolute difference, 2.79% points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.60-2.98; P < .001), with greater effect among immunosuppressed individuals (+4.12 vs +2.70% points; Pinteraction = .002). In younger adults with chronic conditions, letter-based nudges increased vaccination rates by 11.7% points overall and by 13.3% points among those with immunosuppression (Pinteraction = .007). Among immunosuppressed individuals, nudging effects appeared greater for those with immunosuppressive conditions than for those receiving immunosuppressive treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Electronic letter-based nudges increased influenza vaccination rates, with greater benefit among immunosuppressed individuals. These findings support implementation of low-cost, letter-based nudging strategies to improve vaccine uptake in this high-risk population. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT06030726 and NCT06030739.

Adolescent