Interpretable Trials: Is Interpretability a Reason Why Clinical Trials Fail?

Background: There are clinical trials using composite measures, indices, or scales as proxy for independent variables or outcomes. Interpretability of derived measures may not be satisfying. Adopting indices of poor interpretability in clinical trials may lead to trial failure. This study aims to un...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Yi-Sheng Chao, Chao-Jung Wu, Hsing-Chien Wu, Danielle McGolrick, Wei-Chih Chen
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-08-01
Series:Frontiers in Medicine
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmed.2021.541405/full
id doaj-225d51ec0a6a4b7fb48472c720bc6d76
record_format Article
spelling doaj-225d51ec0a6a4b7fb48472c720bc6d762021-08-09T08:07:17ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Medicine2296-858X2021-08-01810.3389/fmed.2021.541405541405Interpretable Trials: Is Interpretability a Reason Why Clinical Trials Fail?Yi-Sheng Chao0Chao-Jung Wu1Hsing-Chien Wu2Danielle McGolrick3Wei-Chih Chen4Wei-Chih Chen5Wei-Chih Chen6Independent Researcher, Montreal, QC, CanadaDépartement d'informatique, Université du Québec à Montréal, Montreal, QC, CanadaTaipei Hospital, Ministry of Health and Welfare, New Taipei City, TaiwanIndependent Researcher, Montreal, QC, CanadaDepartment of Chest Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, TaiwanFaculty of Medicine, School of Medicine, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, TaiwanInstitute of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, School of Medicine, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, TaiwanBackground: There are clinical trials using composite measures, indices, or scales as proxy for independent variables or outcomes. Interpretability of derived measures may not be satisfying. Adopting indices of poor interpretability in clinical trials may lead to trial failure. This study aims to understand the impact of using indices of different interpretability in clinical trials.Methods: The interpretability of indices was categorized as: fair-to-poor, good, and unknown. In the literature, frailty indices were considered fair to poor interpretability. Body mass index (BMI) was highly interpretable. The other indices were of unknown interpretability. The trials were searched at clinicaltrials.gov on October 2, 2018. The use of indices as conditions/diseases or other terms was searched. The trials were grouped as completed, terminated, active, and other status. We tabulated the frequencies of frailty, BMI, and other indices.Results: There were 263,928 clinical trials found and 155,606 were completed or terminated. Among 2,115 trials adopting indices or composite measures as condition or disease, 244 adopted frailty and 487 used BMI without frailty indices. Significantly higher proportions of trials of unknown status used indices as conditions/diseases or other terms, compared to completed and terminated trials. The proportions of active trials using frailty indices were significantly higher than those of completed or terminated trials.Discussion: Clinical trial databases can be used to understand why trials may fail. Based on the findings, we suspect that using indices of poor interpretability may be associated with trial failure. Interpretability has not been conceived as an essential criterion for outcomes or proxy measures in trials. We will continue verifying the findings in other databases or data sources and apply this research method to improve clinical trial design. To prevent patients from experiencing trials likely to fail, we suggest further examining the interpretability of the indices in trials.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmed.2021.541405/fullclinical trialsindicescomposite measureinterpretabilityclinicaltrials.gov
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Yi-Sheng Chao
Chao-Jung Wu
Hsing-Chien Wu
Danielle McGolrick
Wei-Chih Chen
Wei-Chih Chen
Wei-Chih Chen
spellingShingle Yi-Sheng Chao
Chao-Jung Wu
Hsing-Chien Wu
Danielle McGolrick
Wei-Chih Chen
Wei-Chih Chen
Wei-Chih Chen
Interpretable Trials: Is Interpretability a Reason Why Clinical Trials Fail?
Frontiers in Medicine
clinical trials
indices
composite measure
interpretability
clinicaltrials.gov
author_facet Yi-Sheng Chao
Chao-Jung Wu
Hsing-Chien Wu
Danielle McGolrick
Wei-Chih Chen
Wei-Chih Chen
Wei-Chih Chen
author_sort Yi-Sheng Chao
title Interpretable Trials: Is Interpretability a Reason Why Clinical Trials Fail?
title_short Interpretable Trials: Is Interpretability a Reason Why Clinical Trials Fail?
title_full Interpretable Trials: Is Interpretability a Reason Why Clinical Trials Fail?
title_fullStr Interpretable Trials: Is Interpretability a Reason Why Clinical Trials Fail?
title_full_unstemmed Interpretable Trials: Is Interpretability a Reason Why Clinical Trials Fail?
title_sort interpretable trials: is interpretability a reason why clinical trials fail?
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
series Frontiers in Medicine
issn 2296-858X
publishDate 2021-08-01
description Background: There are clinical trials using composite measures, indices, or scales as proxy for independent variables or outcomes. Interpretability of derived measures may not be satisfying. Adopting indices of poor interpretability in clinical trials may lead to trial failure. This study aims to understand the impact of using indices of different interpretability in clinical trials.Methods: The interpretability of indices was categorized as: fair-to-poor, good, and unknown. In the literature, frailty indices were considered fair to poor interpretability. Body mass index (BMI) was highly interpretable. The other indices were of unknown interpretability. The trials were searched at clinicaltrials.gov on October 2, 2018. The use of indices as conditions/diseases or other terms was searched. The trials were grouped as completed, terminated, active, and other status. We tabulated the frequencies of frailty, BMI, and other indices.Results: There were 263,928 clinical trials found and 155,606 were completed or terminated. Among 2,115 trials adopting indices or composite measures as condition or disease, 244 adopted frailty and 487 used BMI without frailty indices. Significantly higher proportions of trials of unknown status used indices as conditions/diseases or other terms, compared to completed and terminated trials. The proportions of active trials using frailty indices were significantly higher than those of completed or terminated trials.Discussion: Clinical trial databases can be used to understand why trials may fail. Based on the findings, we suspect that using indices of poor interpretability may be associated with trial failure. Interpretability has not been conceived as an essential criterion for outcomes or proxy measures in trials. We will continue verifying the findings in other databases or data sources and apply this research method to improve clinical trial design. To prevent patients from experiencing trials likely to fail, we suggest further examining the interpretability of the indices in trials.
topic clinical trials
indices
composite measure
interpretability
clinicaltrials.gov
url https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmed.2021.541405/full
work_keys_str_mv AT yishengchao interpretabletrialsisinterpretabilityareasonwhyclinicaltrialsfail
AT chaojungwu interpretabletrialsisinterpretabilityareasonwhyclinicaltrialsfail
AT hsingchienwu interpretabletrialsisinterpretabilityareasonwhyclinicaltrialsfail
AT daniellemcgolrick interpretabletrialsisinterpretabilityareasonwhyclinicaltrialsfail
AT weichihchen interpretabletrialsisinterpretabilityareasonwhyclinicaltrialsfail
AT weichihchen interpretabletrialsisinterpretabilityareasonwhyclinicaltrialsfail
AT weichihchen interpretabletrialsisinterpretabilityareasonwhyclinicaltrialsfail
_version_ 1721214941867802624