Schultz Medical, a single use instrument company based in Southport, Merseyside have announced they will be exhibiting at MEDICA 2024 in Germany and on the UK Pavilion in Hall 15 hosted by Medilink UK.

The Association of British HealthTech Industries (ABHI) is excited to unveil a diverse delegation of UK HealthTech innovators at MEDICA 2024, one of the world's largest and most influential medical trade fairs.

More than half of patients with asthma in the UK are “potentially overusing” short-acting β2-agonists, according to research.

The UK body that oversees health research is writing a new strategy on clinical trial transparency and it wants to hear opinions on it. The Health Research Authority (HRA) says its strategy aims to “make transparency easy, make compliance clear and make information public.” It has opened a public consultation on the strategy and some […]

An AllTrials report for the House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee this week has found that 33 NHS trust sponsors and six UK universities are reporting none of their clinical trial results, while others have gone from 0% to 100% following an announcement from the Select Committee in January that universities and NHS […]

There has been considerable noise coming out of the UK lately about successes in clinical trial enrollment.

First, a couple months ago came the rather dramatic announcement that clinical trial participation in the UK had "tripled over the last 6 years". That announcement, by the chief executive of the

Sweet creature of bombast: is Sir John writing press releases for the NIHR?

National Institute of Health Research's Clinical Research Network, was quickly and uncritically picked up by the media.

That immediately caught my attention. In large, global trials, most pharmaceutical companies I've worked with can do a reasonable job of predicting accrual levels in a given country. I like to think that if participation rates in any given country had jumped that heavily, I’d have heard something.

(To give an example: looking at a quite-typical study I worked on a few years ago: UK sites were overall slightly below the global average. The highest-enrolling countries were about 2.5 times as fast. So, a 3-fold increase in accruals would have catapulted the UK from below average to the fastest-enrolling country in the world.)

Further inquiry, however, failed to turn up any evidence that the reported tripling actually corresponded to more human beings enrolled in clinical trials. Instead, there is some reason to believe that all we witnessed was increased reporting of trial participation numbers.

Now we have a new source of wonder, and a new giant multiplier coming out of the UK. As the Director of the NIHR's Mental Health Research Network, Til Wykes, put it in her blog coverage of her own paper:

Our research on the largest database of UK mental health studies shows that involving just one or two patients in the study team means studies are 4 times more likely to recruit successfully.

Again, amazing! And not just a tripling – a quadrupling!

Understand: I spend a lot of my time trying to convince study teams to take a more patient-focused approach to clinical trial design and execution. I desperately want to believe this study, and I would love having hard evidence to bring to my clients.

At first glance, the data set seems robust. From the King's College press release:

Published in the British Journal of Psychiatry, the researchers analysed 374 studies registered with the Mental Health Research Network (MHRN).

Studies which included collaboration with service users in designing or running the trial were 1.63 times more likely to recruit to target than studies which only consulted service users.  Studies which involved more partnerships - a higher level of Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) - were 4.12 times more likely to recruit to target.

But here the first crack appears. It's clear from the paper that the analysis of recruitment success was not based on 374 studies, but rather a much smaller subset of 124 studies. That's not mentioned in either of the above-linked articles.

And at this point, we have to stop, set aside our enthusiasm, and read the full paper. And at this point, critical doubts begin to spring up, pretty much everywhere.

First and foremost: I don’t know any nice way to say this, but the "4 times more likely" line is, quite clearly, a fiction. What is reported in the paper is a 4.12 odds ratio between "low involvement" studies and "high involvement" studies (more on those terms in just a bit).  Odds ratios are often used in reporting differences between groups, but they are unequivocally not the same as "times more likely than".

This is not a technical statistical quibble. The authors unfortunately don’t provide the actual success rates for different kinds of studies, but here is a quick example that, given other data they present, is probably reasonably close:

• A Studies: 16 successful out of 20 
• Probability of success: 80% 
• Odds of success: 4 to 1
• B Studies: 40 successful out of 80
• Probability of success: 50%
• Odds of success: 1 to 1

From the above, it’s reasonable to conclude that A studies are 60% more likely to be successful than B studies (the A studies are 1.6 times as likely to succeed). However, the odds ratio is 4.0, similar to the difference in the paper. It makes no sense to say that A studies are 4 times more likely to succeed than B studies.

This is elementary stuff. I’m confident that everyone involved in the conduct and analysis of the MHRN paper knows this already. So why would Dr Wykes write this? I don’t know; it's baffling. Maybe someone with more knowledge of the politics of British medicine can enlighten me.

If a pharmaceutical company had promoted a drug with this math, the warning letters and fines would be flying in the door fast. And rightly so. But if a government leader says it, it just gets recycled verbatim.

The other part of Dr Wykes's statement is almost equally confusing. She claims that the enrollment benefit occurs when "involving just one or two patients in the study team". However, involving one or two patients would seem to correspond to either the lowest ("patient consultation") or the middle level of reported patient involvement (“researcher initiated collaboration”). In fact, the "high involvement" categories that are supposed to be associated with enrollment success are studies that were either fully designed by patients, or were initiated by patients and researchers equally. So, if there is truly a causal relationship at work here, improving enrollment would not be merely a function of adding a patient or two to the conversation.

There are a number of other frustrating aspects of this study as well. It doesn't actually measure patient involvement in any specific research program, but uses just 3 broad categories (that the researchers specified at the beginning of each study). It uses an arbitrary and undocumented 17-point scale to measure "study complexity", which collapses and quite likely underweights many critical factors into a single number. The enrollment analysis excluded 11 studies because they weren't adequate for a factor that was later deemed non-significant. And probably the most frustrating facet of the paper is that the authors share absolutely no descriptive data about the studies involved in the enrollment analysis. It would be completely impossible to attempt to replicate its methods or verify its analysis. Do the authors believe that "Public Involvement" is only good when it’s not focused on their own work?

However, my feelings about the study and paper are an insignificant fraction of the frustration I feel about the public portrayal of the data by people who should clearly know better. After all, limited evidence is still evidence, and every study can add something to our knowledge. But the public misrepresentation of the evidence by leaders in the area can only do us harm: it has the potential to actively distort research priorities and funding.

Why This Matters

We all seem to agree that research is too slow. Low clinical trial enrollment wastes time, money, and the health of patients who need better treatment options.

However, what's also clear is that we lack reliable evidence on what activities enable us to accelerate the pace of enrollment without sacrificing quality. If we are serious about improving clinical trial accrual, we owe it to our patients to demand robust evidence for what works and what doesn’t. Relying on weak evidence that we've already solved the problem ("we've tripled enrollment!") or have a method to magically solve it ("PPI quadrupled enrollment!") will cause us to divert significant time, energy, and human health into areas that are politically favored but less than certain to produce benefit. And the overhyping those results by research leadership compounds that problem substantially. NIHR leadership should reconsider its approach to public discussion of its research, and practice what it preaches: critical assessment of the data.
Ennis L, & Wykes T (2013). Impact of patient involvement in mental health research: longitudinal study. The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science PMID: 24029538

Fugitive lawyer Charles Yeo, who is in custody in the UK, is currently awaiting an extradition hearing, reported CNA on Tuesday (Nov 12).  A court date for the extradition hearing has not been determined, but Yeo is set to attend a bail hearing on Friday, according to the report. In an Instagram post on Nov 1, the former chairman of the Reform Party said the Singapore government had made a formal request for his extradition. In his post, Yeo also said that he will be presenting himself, together with his legal team, at Westminster Magistrates Court on Nov 11. Yeo left Singapore in July 2022 after being charged earlier that year with multiple offences relating to harassment and wounding the religious feelings of Christians in several social media posts. In August 2022, a warrant of arrest was issued against him for breaching the conditions for overseas travel while on bail.  He was allowed to travel to Vietnam for work, but failed to return to Singapore and claimed he was seeking political asylum in the UK. 

Dec 15, 2023

Mariana Budjeryn writes: War never stops at the border, especially on a continent like Europe. The European Union absorbed millions of Ukrainian war refugees and poured billions of euros into Ukraine's defenses and economic survival. The war permanently reshaped Europe: its demographics, political economy, and energy architecture are shifting in ways that will have irreversible long-term consequences. All of this is because in a very real sense Ukraine already is inextricably woven into the fabric of Europe: Ukraine’s pain is Europe’s pain and Ukraine’s gain will inevitably be Europe's gain, too.

Feb 20, 2024

Mariana Budjeryn reflects on the tenth anniversary of her native Ukraine's Revolution of Dignity.

Oct 27, 2022

Kennedy’s statecraft in the missile crisis provides a rich source of clues that can help illuminate the challenge the United States now faces, and the choices President Joe Biden is making.

Feb 24, 2023

The war in Ukraine affects regions around the world in a variety of ways. Belfer Center experts reflect on how the conflict is impacting the countries and regions they study.

In Ambassador Mulford's January 7 farewell call on External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee, the Minister said he understood the seriousness of the error in releasing sensitive intelligence from the Mumbai terrorism investigations and pledged that the Ministry would not further disseminate that information.

Jan 10, 2023

Technology will play a crucial role in that process. Since 2014, Ukraine has been at the forefront of the digital revolution through a journey marked by strength, adaptability, and success.  Digital transformation transcends and affects all economic sectors in Ukraine. Digital solutions have been applied in a wide range of sectors including banking and finance, agriculture and food production, and energy, to cite a few. In that regard, digital transformation is key to a well-functioning society, affecting democratic participation, education, and public services.

Jan 10, 2023

The aim of the report is to focus specifically on the critical role of private sector investment in Ukraine’s economic reconstruction, and how the private sector, both within Ukraine and internationally, can enable Ukraine to win the peace. It provides a short overview of the economic challenges facing Ukraine, including governance, the sectors that will be critical to Ukraine's reconstruction, the roles and responsibilities for the G7, EU, IFIs, and DFIs, and then recommendations for how Ukraine and its partners can best attract private sector investment.

Feb 20, 2023

U.S. President Joe Biden spent five hours in the Ukrainian capital on Monday, meeting President Volodymyr Zelensky and even taking a stroll through the streets of Kyiv – despite the sound of air sirens – to visit The Wall of Remembrance, which displays portraits of the approximately 4,500 Ukrainian soldiers who have died since Russia annexed Crimea in 2014.

The trip was kept under a media blackout until a few hours after Biden’s arrival, with the president’s official schedule only saying he would fly in the evening to Warsaw for a planned visit. The New York Times reported, quoting an anonymous official source, that Biden arrived in Kyiv early this morning after making the same 10-hour long journey from Poland that every world leader visiting Ukraine since the start of the war has.

Feb 23, 2023

The Belfer Center at Harvard Kennedy School hosted a virtual conversation with Ukraine's Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba Wednesday (Feb. 22) to discuss the war in Ukraine as it reaches a full year since Russia's invasion. 

Apr 10, 2023

The following is an event write-up about the recent Future of Diplomacy Project (FDP) seminar on “The Geopolitics of Latin America amid the War in Ukraine and China-U.S. Tensions” moderated by Negah Angha, Fellow at the Institute of Politics, on March 29, 2023.

Apr 18, 2023

The following is an event write-up about the recent Future of Diplomacy Project (FDP) seminar on “The Future of Ukraine: Reconstruction, Energy Security, and Innovation” moderated by Ambassador Paula J. Dobriansky, Senior Fellow with the Future of Diplomacy Project. 

May 31, 2023

Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, the current Belarusian opposition leader, speaks with Belfer Center Fellow Svenja Kirsch on Belarusian Freedom and the War in Ukraine.

Mar 15, 2024

Europe after the Russo-Ukrainian War must develop a new security structure to defend against any Russian aggression. The safest option is a non-offensive, confidence-building defense. This option includes proposals such as the “spider in the web” strategy and the “porcupine” strategy to provide for European security in a region threatened by Russian expansion—without relying on the threat of nuclear war.

Mar 28, 2024

Confronted by the accelerating climate crisis, Western governments, NGOs, and academia are grappling with a difficult question: Should the West engage with Russia on science and conservation, at a time when Russia is waging an unjust and violent war on a sovereign nation?

This study group, led by Arctic Initiative Senior Fellow Margaret Williams, is evaluating the costs and benefits of renewing cooperation with Russia on science and conservation issues.

Apr 29, 2024

Mariana Budjeryn writes that despite, or perhaps because, of this ever-present shadow of war, the 16th annual Kyiv Security Forum, which was held in March 2024, was a display of camaraderie and solidarity with Ukraine, with sincere dues paid to Ukraine's bravery, sacrifices, and resilience, as well as in recognition that Ukraine belongs in the transatlantic security architecture.

Jul 16, 2024

In June, Ukraine’s most powerful backers met at the G7 summit before attending Ukraine’s peace conference in Switzerland, which hosted representatives from nearly eighty countries. For one week, they met to discuss Volodymyr Zelensky’s ten-point peace plan, announced a plan to fund Ukraine using frozen Russian assets, and introduced a U.S.-Ukraine bilateral security agreement. As the United States and its allies are working to put Ukraine in the best position possible for eventual ceasefire negotiations, what should their top priority be?

Apr 17, 2024

Mariana Budjeryn presents "Russia's Invasion of Ukraine and Its Impact on the Global Nuclear Order" at the DOE/NNSA Administrator's Strategy Forum

Jun 4, 2024

Joseph Nye Russia's war on Ukraine is still raging, and no one knows when or how it will end. Nonetheless, the past two years have borne out several predictions concerning what does and does not work in twenty-first-century conflicts involving major powers.

Samruk Kazyna Corporate Transformation is Set to Generate an Additional $11bn in Revenues to Kazakhstan in the Next Six Years

Campen Auktioner A/S - Specialbilauktion #482 Palmes�ndag

The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society exists to find cures and ensure access to treatments for blood cancer patients. We are saving lives not someday, but today.

Christine Attia lost her fianc� just two years ago after he lost a courageous six-month battle with acute myeloid leukemia. She reminds everyone, while breakthrough therapies are saving lives, work still needs to be done to find cures.

Dr. David Weinstock of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute discusses his LLS grant

Healthcare leaders and the public say how they would balance the NHS� books

Üks tänahommikusel loodusretkel kohatud tiivulistest – väike nunnukas.

Incredible illustrations by Paris based artist - Yukiko Noritake. She works with Louis Vuitton, Piaget, Airbnb, Elle and other...

The post Illustrations by Yukiko Noritake first appeared on peopleofdesign.

People conceived during the UK's 1940s and 50s sugar rationing have a lower risk of type 2 diabetes and high blood pressure than those conceived after rationing ended

Namikawa appears as young Count Piast in 8th episode on Saturday

Okumura to work as freelance artist while studying drawing/writing

Manga launched in October 2023

Keiga Ōsawa's Rokunin no Usotsuki no Daigakusei: Plus One manga launched in 2022

The government's official forecaster raises its prediction for UK growth in 2024 and 2025 but reduces it for later years.

Economists say the state of public finances should not have come as a complete surprise to the new government.

David Lammy is on his first visit to the continent since he became foreign secretary.

The president-elect's positions on issues ranging from Ukraine to trade have implications for the UK.

Politicians say we're living in dangerous times, and Trump is a lot less willing than Biden to pay for Europe's defence.

Darren Jones says there "shouldn't be an element of conceding to illegal invasions from Russia".

The leaders' discussions also focused on the Middle East and the problems caused by migration in Europe.

The PM insists the government will not "tell people how to live their lives" in achieving the aim.