Skip to main content
. 2020 May 12;21:398. doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04329-8

Table 2.

Comparison of RCTs accessing RCHD with trials evaluated by the HRA in 2015

RCTs accessing RCHD
(n = 160)
HRA in 2015a
(n = 963b)
Recruitment setting
 Primary care 41 (26%) 48 (5%)
 Secondary care 119 (74%) 846 (95%)
 Unclear/missing 0 69
Therapeutic area
 Cancer 47 (29%) 168 (17%)
 Cardiovascular and stroke 46 (29%) 121 (13%)
 Pregnancy and childbirth 9 (6%) 30 (3%)
 Infection 8 (5%) 55 (6%)
 Inflammatory disorder 5 (3%) 72 (7%)
Drug trial 76 (48%) 515 (53%)
Randomisation
 Individual 136 (85%) 934 (97%)
 Cluster trial 24 (15%) 29 (3%)
Feasibility/pilot 17 (11%) 177 (18%)
Sample size (median, range) 1590 (41–6,000,000) 275 (6–30,000)
 Unclear/missing 0 440
Recruitment location
 UK only 125 (78%) 450 (50%)
 International trials 32 (20%) 443 (50%)
 Unclear/missing 0 70

This table only includes data fields that were comparable between the two sources. Sample size targets in the UK Health Research Authority (HRA) cohort are limited to those not described as phase I/II trials. Data obtained from Clark et al. [11] (2018), including unpublished supplementary appendices [1]. Abbreviations: RCHD routinely collected health data, RCT randomised controlled trial

aClark et al. [11].

bFor recruitment setting and location, the unclear/missing values were omitted from the percentage calculation.