We appreciate Dr Quessy's insightful comments. We used Sherlock
2
to download data from ClinicalTrials.gov and to illustrate the value of those data.
3
Therefore, we are pleased to see discussion on the implications of the study findings.To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to The Journal of PainAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Placebo response changes depending on the neuropathic pain syndrome: Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis.Pain Med. 2012; 13: 575-595
- From ClinicalTrials.gov trial registry to an analysis-ready database of clinical trial results.Clin Trials. 2013; 10: 347-348
- Use of ClinicalTrials.gov to estimate condition-specific nocebo effects and other factors affecting outcomes of analgesic trials.J Pain. 2013; 14: 405-411
Article info
Identification
Copyright
© 2013 American Pain Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
ScienceDirect
Access this article on ScienceDirectLinked Article
- How Should We Interrogate the ClinicalTrials.gov Database?The Journal of PainVol. 14Issue 9
- PreviewThe recently published article by Cepeda et al compiling pain trial data from the ClinicalTrials.gov database is important for the large number of randomized trials summarized (>7,000 trials).1 Much of the analysis focuses on attrition. However, several issues arising from the analyses warrant comment.
- Full-Text
- Preview
