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