Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
PulseExploreClubsResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeClubsExplore
December 8, 2025Blood

Measuring success by different rulers: Heterogeneity in definition of outcomes in immune thrombocytopenia trials

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Authors

DGDavid Gómez‐Almaguer

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Overview

Systematic review of clinical trials reveals low adherence to guidelines on outcomes in immune thrombocytopenia, suggesting variability may hinder evidence synthesis.

Key Points

  • Only 20.3% of primary outcomes in trials for immune thrombocytopenia adhered to established guidelines.
  • The majority of included trials were phase 3 and randomized, predominantly conducted in China.
  • Clinical trials frequently lacked clear diagnostic criteria and had inconsistent outcome definitions.
  • Widespread variability in outcome definitions complicates evidence synthesis in immune thrombocytopenia research.

Cite This Study

David Gómez‐Almaguer (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69362f694fa91c937236de9ahttps://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2025-3038
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share