Trials (TRIALS )
Trials is an open access, peer-reviewed, online journal that will encompass all aspects of the performance and findings of randomized controlled trials. Trials will experiment with, and then refine, innovative approaches to improving communication about trials. We are keen to move beyond publishing traditional trial results articles (although these will be included). We believe this represents an exciting opportunity to advance the science and reporting of trials. Prior to 2006, Trials was published as Current Controlled Trials in Cardiovascular Medicine (CCTCVM). All published CCTCVM articles are available via the Trials website and citations to CCTCVM article URLs will continue to be supported. The impact factor shown relates to articles published in CCTCVM during 2003-4. Making all its content open access and not retaining copyright, Trials offers a way to make data both freely available and highly visible to trialists worldwide; this will benefit the impact of your publication among peers and society. The journal has unrestricted space and takes advantage of all the technical possibilities available for electronic publishing. To date, journals have focused on reporting the results of trials, with very little coverage of why and how they are conducted. Reports of trials have been restricted both by authors and editors - both parties often select only a subset of the outcomes measured, while the latter often impose word limits on the articles published making it difficult to communicate the lessons learnt from conducting the trial, let alone include adequate details of how the trial was conducted. The Internet offers both unlimited space and interactivity, and we are keen to harness these attributes. For instance, trialists will be able to provide the detail required to be a true scientific record and do more to make the article's message comprehensible to a variety of reader groups. They will also be able to communicate not only all outcome measures, as well as varying analyses and interpretations, but also in-depth descriptions of what they did and what they learnt. This sharing of direct experience is fundamental to improving the quality and conduct of trials worldwide.
- Impact factor2.21Show impact factor historyHide impact factor history
- 5-year impact2.61
- Cited half-life2.90
- Immediacy index0.14
- Article influence1.03
- WebsiteTrials website
- Other titlesTrials journal
- Material typeDocument, Periodical, Internet resource
- Document typeInternet Resource, Computer File, Journal / Magazine / Newspaper
Publications in this journal
- SourceAvailable from: PubMed Central[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The incidence of oropharyngeal cancer is increasing in the developed world. This has led to a large rise in research activity and clinical trials in this area, yet there is no consensus on which outcomes should be measured. As a result, the outcomes measured often differ between trials of comparable interventions, making the combination or comparison of results between trials impossible. Outcomes may also be 'cherry-picked', such that favourable results are reported, and less favourable results withheld. The development of a minimum outcome reporting standard, known as a core outcome set, goes some way to addressing these problems. Core outcome sets are ideally developed using a patient-centred approach so that the outcomes measured are relevant to patients and clinical practice. Core outcome sets drive up the quality and relevance of research by ensuring that the right outcomes are consistently measured and reported in trials in specific areas of health or healthcare.Methods/design: This is a mixed methods study involving three phases to develop a core outcome set for oropharyngeal cancer clinical trials. Firstly, a systematic review will establish which outcomes are measured in published oropharyngeal cancer randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Secondly, qualitative interviews with patients and carers in the UK and the USA will aim to establish which outcomes are important to these stakeholders. Data from these first two stages will be used to develop a comprehensive list of outcomes to be considered for inclusion in the core outcome set. In the third stage, patients and clinicians will participate in an iterative consensus exercise known as a Delphi study to refine the contents of the core outcome set. This protocol lays out the methodology to be implemented in the CONSENSUS study.Trials 05/2014; 15(1):168.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis is characterized by the irreversible dilatation of the medium-sized bronchi as a result of airway injury from recurrent or chronic inflammation and lower respiratory tract infections. Bronchiectasis airways are commonly colonized with bacterial species. Infections of the airways play important role in bronchiectasis exacerbations. The non-specific prevention of recurrent airway infections by immunostimulating agents has gained growing interest. OM-85, consisting of extracts of eight kinds of bacteria important in respiratory infections, could support the respiratory tract resistance to the pathogens. OM-85 has been shown to be a benefit by decreasing the risk of acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in several perspective clinical trials. Exacerbation of bronchiectasis substantially contributes to a more rapid decline in lung function, reduced quality of life, and healthcare costs. In this context, we plan to conduct a clinical trial to investigate the PReventive effect of OM-85 on Bronchiectasis Exacerbation in Chinese patients (iPROBE). This study is designed as a prospective, randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled multicenter trial. A total of 244 patients with bronchiectasis, who have had at least one exacerbation of bronchiectasis in the previous year, will be included. The subjects will randomly receive two courses of 7 mg of OM-85 or a matching placebo. The treatment dose of OM-85 will be one daily capsule taken orally for 10 days each month for 3 consecutive months at the beginning of the study, followed by 3 months of no drug.This schedule will repeat until the patient has been seen for one year. We will investigate whether long-term treatment with an oral immunostimulant (OM-85) could decrease exacerbations of bronchiectasis over a one-year period. We will also assess other relevant outcomes, including the rate of event-based exacerbation, lung function parameters, and total scores judged by the St George's respiratory questionnaire, Leicester cough questionnaire, and inflammatory index. We hope that this study will provide new information on the preventive effects of OM-85 on bronchiectasis exacerbations and will address a knowledge gap for this understudied disease.Trial registration: This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (identifier NCT 01968421) on 19 October 2013.Trials 04/2014; 15(1):150.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Following discharge home from the ICU, patients often suffer from reduced physical function, exercise capacity, health-related quality of life and social functioning. There is usually no support to address these longer term problems, and there has been limited research carried out into interventions which could improve patient outcomes. The aim of this study is to investigate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a 6-week programme of exercise on physical function in patients discharged from hospital following critical illness compared to standard care. The study design is a multicentre prospective phase II, allocation-concealed, assessor-blinded, randomised controlled clinical trial. Participants randomised to the intervention group will complete three exercise sessions per week (two sessions of supervised exercise and one unsupervised session) for 6 weeks. Supervised sessions will take place in a hospital gymnasium or, if this is not possible, in the participants home and the unsupervised session will take place at home. Blinded outcome assessment will be conducted at baseline after hospital discharge, following the exercise intervention, and at 6 months following baseline assessment (or equivalent time points for the standard care group). The primary outcome measure is physical function as measured by the physical functioning subscale of the Short-Form-36 health survey following the exercise programme. Secondary outcomes are health-related quality of life, exercise capacity, anxiety and depression, self efficacy to exercise and healthcare resource use. In addition, semi-structured interviews will be conducted to explore participants' perceptions of the exercise programme, and the feasibility (safety, practicality and acceptability) of providing the exercise programme will be assessed. A within-trial cost-utility analysis to assess the cost-effectiveness of the intervention compared to standard care will also be conducted. If the exercise programme is found to be effective, this study will improve outcomes that are meaningful to patients and their families. It will inform the design of a future multicentre phase III clinical trial of exercise following recovery from critical illness. It will provide useful information which will help the development of services for patients after critical illness.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01463579.Trials 04/2014; 15(1):146.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.