Skip to main content

Table 2 Distribution of studies that reported progression criteria

From: The reporting of progression criteria in protocols of pilot trials designed to assess the feasibility of main trials is insufficient: a meta-epidemiological study

Variable Number (%); 95% CI*
Overall 45 (19.8); 14.8–25.6
Journal
PAFS** 9 (20.0); 9.6–34.6
BMJ Open*** 16 (35.6); 21.9–51.2
Trials 20 (44.4); 29.6–60.0
Year of publication
 2013 4 (8.9); 2.5–21.2
 2014 3 (6.7); 1.3–18.3
 2015 5 (11.1); 3.7–24.1
 2016 19 (42.2); 27.6–57.8
 2017 14 (31.1); 18.2–46.7
Region
 North America 21 (46.7); 31.6–62.13
 Europe 21 (46.7); 31.6–62.13
 Other 3 (6.7); 1.3–18.3
Funding
 Industry 12 (28.6); 14.6–41.9
 Government or private 30 (71.4); 51.1–80.0
Intervention type
 Pharmacological 7 (15.6); 6.5–29.5
 Non-pharmacological 37 (82.2); 67.9–92.0
Feasibility outcomes (yes) 29 (64.4); 48.8–78.13
Sample size reported (yes) 45 (100); 92.13–100.00
Sample size
 Small (n = 0–60) 29 (64.4); 48.8–78.1
 Large (n > 60) 16 (35.6); 21.9–51.2
Sample size justification
 Adequate 28 (62.2); 46.5–76.2
 Inadequate 17 (37.8); 23.7–53.5
  1. *Confidence interval for percentage
  2. **Pilot and Feasibility Studies
  3. ***British Medical Journal