scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

Clinical Trial Service Unit

About: Clinical Trial Service Unit is a based out in . It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Stroke. The organization has 428 authors who have published 1387 publications receiving 181920 citations.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
05 Nov 1994-BMJ
TL;DR: The aim was to include all unconfounded properly randomised trials of antiplatelets versus no antiplatelet therapy that could have been available for review by March 1990 in which deep venous thrombosis was systematically and unbiasedly monitored.
Abstract: Venous thromboses and pulmonary embolism remain an important cause of morbidity and mortality both in surgical patients and in immobilised medical patients.*RF 1-5* Various thromboprophylactic treatments have, therefore, been devised to prevent or limit thromboembolism. Our previous systematic overview (or meta-analysis) of randomised trials of perioperative subcutaneous heparin found that among surgical patients such treatment can roughly halve the risk not only of deep venous thrombosis but, more importantly, of pulmonary embolism6 (see fig 1). Subcutaneous heparin is now widely recommended for surgical or medical patients at high risk of venous occlusion.*RF 3-5* The recent Antiplatelet Trialists' Collaboration overview of the thromboprophylactic effects of antiplatelet therapy used prospectively determined criteria for trial inclusion and treatment comparisons that were similar to those of the previous heparin overview.*RF 6-8* The aim was to include all unconfounded properly randomised trials of antiplatelet versus no antiplatelet therapy (or of one antiplatelet regimen versus another) that could have been available for review by March 1990 in which deep venous thrombosis was systematically and unbiasedly monitored. (Parts I and III of the previous overview report give a fuller description of the methods used.1,7 The appropriateness of using “assumption free” statistical methods rather than the “random effects” model when combining trial results, as when combining results from different centres in a multicentre trial, has been discussed in detail previously.9,10) Such randomised trials were to be included whether or not the treatment comparison was “blinded” by placebo control. This was also the case in the heparin overview, where exclusion of informative “open” trials (in particular, the important open international multicentre trials coordinated by Professor V V Kakkar11) would have been equally inappropriate. Analyses confined to placebo controlled studies, which may be less subject to treatment dependent biases in the assessment …

74 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A systematic review and meta-analysis conducted by Kazem Rahimi and colleagues re-evaluates the hypothesis, generated in previous studies, that statins may reduce the risk of venous thromboembolic events and does not support the previous findings.
Abstract: Background: It has been suggested that statins substantially reduce the risk of venous thromboembolic events. We sought to test this hypothesis by performing a meta-analysis of both published and unpublished results from randomised trials of statins. Methods and Findings: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL up to March 2012 for randomised controlled trials comparing statin with no statin, or comparing high dose versus standard dose statin, with 100 or more randomised participants and at least 6 months’ follow-up. Investigators were contacted for unpublished information about venous thromboembolic events during follow-up. Twenty-two trials of statin versus control (105,759 participants) and seven trials of an intensive versus a standard dose statin regimen (40,594 participants) were included. In trials of statin versus control, allocation to statin therapy did not significantly reduce the risk of venous thromboembolic events (465 [0.9%] statin versus 521 [1.0%] control, odds ratio [OR]=0.89, 95% CI 0.78–1.01, p=0.08) with no evidence of heterogeneity between effects on deep vein thrombosis (266 versus 311, OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.72–1.01) and effects on pulmonary embolism (205 versus 222, OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.76–1.12). Exclusion of the trial result that provided the motivation for our meta-analysis (JUPITER) had little impact on the findings for venous thromboembolic events (431 [0.9%] versus 461 [1.0%], OR=0.93 [95% CI 0.82–1.07], p=0.32 among the other 21 trials). There was no evidence that higher dose statin therapy reduced the risk of venous thromboembolic events compared with standard dose statin therapy (198 [1.0%] versus 202 [1.0%], OR=0.98, 95% CI 0.80– 1.20, p=0.87). Risk of bias overall was small but a certain degree of effect underestimation due to random error cannot be ruled out. Conclusions: The findings from this meta-analysis do not support the previous suggestion of a large protective effect of statins (or higher dose statins) on venous thromboembolic events. However, a more moderate reduction in risk up to about one-fifth cannot be ruled out. Please see later in the article for the Editors’ Summary.

74 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Vascular disease and left ventricular hypertrophy are prevalent among patients with chronic kidney disease not requiring dialysis, and other features of the uremic syndrome such as anemia, hyperhomocysteinemia, and inflammation may contribute.

73 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The rationale for individual patient data reviews is discussed and some of the features will add to the analyses that can be performed and the reviewer allows the reviewer to overcome many of the problems associated with a reliance on published data alone.
Abstract: Systematic reviews help people to make well-informed decisions about health care by bringing together the relevant evidence, appraising it and, where appropriate, combining it in a meta-analysis. The ultimate aim for a systematic review should be to present all relevant data on all participants in all research judged to be eligible for the review. In reviews of the effects of interventions, this ultimate aim would be met through the collection and analyses of the results of all relevant randomized trials. Reviews that use individual patient data achieve this by the central collection and analyses of data on each participant in the trials. It allows the reviewer to overcome many of the problems associated with a reliance on published data alone, and some of the problems associated with using aggregate data supplied by the trialist, and will add to the analyses that can be performed. This chapter discusses the rationale for individual patient data reviews and describes some of their features.

72 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Alexessander Couto Alves1, Alexessander Couto Alves2, N. Maneka G. De Silva2, Ville Karhunen2, Ulla Sovio3, Shikta Das2, Shikta Das4, H. Rob Taal5, H. Rob Taal6, Nicole M. Warrington7, Nicole M. Warrington8, Alexandra M. Lewin2, Alexandra M. Lewin9, Marika Kaakinen1, Marika Kaakinen2, Diana L. Cousminer10, Diana L. Cousminer11, Diana L. Cousminer12, Elisabeth Thiering13, Nicholas J. Timpson14, Tom Bond2, Estelle Lowry15, Christopher D. Brown16, Xavier Estivill, Virpi Lindi10, Jonathan P. Bradfield11, Frank Geller17, Doug Speed18, Doug Speed4, Lachlan J. M. Coin2, Lachlan J. M. Coin7, Marie Loh15, Marie Loh2, Marie Loh19, Sheila J. Barton20, Sheila J. Barton21, Lawrence J. Beilin8, Hans Bisgaard22, Klaus Bønnelykke22, Rohia Alili, Ida J. Hatoum23, Katharina Schramm24, Rufus Cartwright2, Marie-Aline Charles25, Vincenzo Salerno2, Karine Clément25, Annique Claringbould, Cornelia M. van Duijn5, Elena Moltchanova26, Johan G. Eriksson12, Johan G. Eriksson27, Cathy E. Elks3, Bjarke Feenstra17, Claudia Flexeder, Stephen Franks2, Timothy M. Frayling28, Rachel M. Freathy28, Paul Elliott2, Paul Elliott29, Elisabeth Widen12, Hakon Hakonarson, Andrew T. Hattersley28, Alina Rodriguez30, Alina Rodriguez2, Marco Banterle9, Joachim Heinrich, Barbara Heude25, John W. Holloway31, Albert Hofman5, Elina Hyppönen32, Elina Hyppönen33, Hazel Inskip20, Hazel Inskip21, Lee M. Kaplan23, Åsa K. Hedman34, Åsa K. Hedman35, Esa Läärä15, Holger Prokisch24, Harald Grallert, Timo A. Lakka10, Debbie A Lawlor14, Mads Melbye17, Mads Melbye22, Mads Melbye36, Tarunveer S. Ahluwalia22, Marcella Marinelli, Iona Y Millwood37, Iona Y Millwood35, Lyle J. Palmer38, Craig E. Pennell8, John R. B. Perry3, Susan M. Ring14, Markku J. Savolainen15, Fernando Rivadeneira5, Marie Standl, Jordi Sunyer, Carla M. T. Tiesler13, André G. Uitterlinden5, William Schierding39, Justin M. O'Sullivan39, Inga Prokopenko, Karl-Heinz Herzig, George Davey Smith14, Paul F. O'Reilly2, Paul F. O'Reilly40, Janine F. Felix5, Janine F. Felix6, Jessica L. Buxton41, Alexandra I. F. Blakemore2, Alexandra I. F. Blakemore42, Ken K. Ong3, Vincent W. V. Jaddoe5, Struan F.A. Grant, Sylvain Sebert15, Sylvain Sebert2, Mark I. McCarthy35, Mark I. McCarthy43, Marjo-Riitta Järvelin 
TL;DR: A robust overlap is found between the genetics of child and adult body mass index (BMI), with variants associated with adult BMI acting as early as 4 to 6 years old, and a completely distinct genetic makeup for peak BMI during infancy is demonstrated, influenced by variation at the LEPR/LEPROT locus.
Abstract: Early childhood growth patterns are associated with adult health, yet the genetic factors and the developmental stages involved are not fully understood. Here, we combine genome-wide association studies with modeling of longitudinal growth traits to study the genetics of infant and child growth, followed by functional, pathway, genetic correlation, risk score, and colocalization analyses to determine how developmental timings, molecular pathways, and genetic determinants of these traits overlap with those of adult health. We found a robust overlap between the genetics of child and adult body mass index (BMI), with variants associated with adult BMI acting as early as 4 to 6 years old. However, we demonstrated a completely distinct genetic makeup for peak BMI during infancy, influenced by variation at the LEPR/LEPROT locus. These findings suggest that different genetic factors control infant and child BMI. In light of the obesity epidemic, these findings are important to inform the timing and targets of prevention strategies.

72 citations


Authors

Showing all 428 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Salim Yusuf2311439252912
Richard Peto183683231434
Cornelia M. van Duijn1831030146009
Rory Collins162489193407
Naveed Sattar1551326116368
Timothy J. Key14680890810
John Danesh135394100132
Andrew J.S. Coats12782094490
Valerie Beral11447153729
Mike Clarke1131037164328
Robert Clarke11151290049
Robert U. Newton10975342527
Richard Gray10980878580
Braxton D. Mitchell10255849599
Naomi E. Allen10136437057
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
VU University Medical Center
22.9K papers, 1.1M citations

90% related

Leiden University Medical Center
38K papers, 1.6M citations

90% related

Brigham and Women's Hospital
110.5K papers, 6.8M citations

89% related

Mayo Clinic
169.5K papers, 8.1M citations

88% related

John Radcliffe Hospital
23.6K papers, 1.4M citations

88% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
2021136
2020116
2019122
201894
2017106
201688