Sammenlign metoder
Gjennomgå de valgte metodene side om side; rader som avviker, er uthevet.
| Retrospektiv fase III klinisk studie× | Fase II klinisk studie× | |
|---|---|---|
| Fagfelt | Epidemiologi | Epidemiologi |
| Familie | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Opprinnelsesår≠ | Late 20th century (ICH E8 1997; widespread retrospective Phase III use from 1990s onward) | 1960s–1970s (formalised in US federal drug regulation) |
| Opphavsperson≠ | Regulatory framework codified by ICH E8/E9 (1997–1998); retrospective application developed through post-marketing and registry practice | U.S. Food and Drug Administration / ICH E8 guidelines (institutionalised framework) |
| Type≠ | Retrospective comparative clinical study | Interventional clinical study design |
| Opprinnelig kilde≠ | Friedman, L. M., Furberg, C. D., & DeMets, D. L. (2010). Fundamentals of Clinical Trials (4th ed.). Springer. ISBN: 978-1441915856 | Friedman, L. M., Furberg, C. D., DeMets, D. L., Reboussin, D. M., & Granger, C. B. (2015). Fundamentals of Clinical Trials (5th ed.). Springer. ISBN: 978-3319185392 |
| Alias | retrospective Phase III study, historical Phase III trial, Phase III retrospective analysis, retrospective comparative efficacy trial | Phase 2 trial, Phase II study, early efficacy trial, proof-of-concept trial |
| Relaterte≠ | 5 | 6 |
| Sammendrag≠ | A retrospective Phase III clinical trial evaluates the comparative efficacy and safety of an intervention against a control using data that were collected before the study was designed. Rather than enrolling new patients prospectively, researchers analyze existing records — from registries, hospital databases, or historical trial archives — to address a Phase III-level question: does Treatment A outperform the current standard of care in a large, representative patient population? This design is used when prospective enrollment is infeasible, unethical, or when historical data are sufficiently complete to support a rigorous comparison. | A Phase II clinical trial is the second stage in the drug or intervention development pipeline, conducted after Phase I safety testing. Its primary goal is to assess whether the intervention shows preliminary efficacy signals in a relevant patient population at the dose established in Phase I, while continuing to characterise the safety and tolerability profile. Phase II trials are generally smaller than Phase III confirmatory trials and serve as critical go/no-go decision points before large-scale investment. |
| ScholarGateDatasett ↗ |
|
|