Skip to main content

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)