Table 3 Reasons for using different primary outcome
From: Using systematic reviews to inform NIHR HTA trial planning and design: a retrospective cohort
Reasons | Cohort I No. of applications (%) | Cohort II No. of applications (%) |
|---|---|---|
(n = 14) | (n = 8) | |
Change requested by HTA commissioning board | 2 (14.2) | 0 (0) |
Feasibility/Pilot Study | 2 (25) | 0 (0) |
Heterogeneous outcomes in the review | 1 (7.1) | 0 (0) |
Primary outcome not believed to be clinically important | 11 (78.5) | 2 (25) |
Unclear | 0 (0) | 4 (50) |