Format:
Videos,
Language/s:
English,
čeština,
dansk,
Deutsche,
eesti,
español,
français,
Gaeilge,
italiano,
latviešu,
lietuvių,
magyar,
Malti,
Nederlands,
polski,
português,
română,
slovenčina,
slovenščina,
suomi,
svenska,
Greek,
Bulgarian,
Target Audience:
Self-directed learning |
Undergraduate |
Short Description:
This lay-friendly video introduction to clinical trials was created by the European Communication on Research Awareness Needs Project.
Key Concepts addressed:
Details
This 5-minute lay-friendly video was created by the European Communication on Research Awareness Needs (ECRAN) Project. The animation is available in 23 languages and is aimed at a lay audience, or those with little knowledge about clinical trials. The ECRAN group have also produced a great powerpoint presentation explaining clinical trial for patients(15-minutes).
Enjoy the film and discover how Clinical Trials work today.
Clinical Research from ECRAN project on Vimeo .
About the video
Trial participants should be similar to those in which the treatment will be used in real life.
The ECRAN video explains the following key aspects of clinical trials:
The clinical trial protocol must be approved by an ethics committee, with independent experts and patients’ representatives
Participants should be divided into similar groups which receive the treatments and control or placebo respectively
Random allocation of participants to these groups
Participants, carers and researchers should be blinded to treatment allocation
Results should be replicated in other independent trials
The benefits and risks of new treatments should be evaluated together
Trials should look at outcomes that matter to patients
Common pitfalls :
Placebos should not be used where there are effective treatments available
Trials should include patients like those in whom the treatment would be used in real life
Treatments should improve outcomes that are important to patients
New treatments should be better than the current treatment, not just a placebo
Languages
The video is available in the following languages:
bg – български
Fullscreen: Vimeo
Download: mp4
en – English
Fullscreen: Vimeo
Download: mp4
lv – latviešu
Fullscreen: Vimeo
Download: mp4
ro – română
Fullscreen: Vimeo
Download: mp4
cs – čeština
Fullscreen: Vimeo
Download: mp4
es – español
Fullscreen: Vimeo
Download: mp4
hu – magyar
Fullscreen: Vimeo
Download: mp4
sk – slovenčina
Fullscreen: Vimeo
Download: mp4
da – dansk
Fullscreen: Vimeo
Download: mp4
fr – français
Fullscreen: Vimeo
Download: mp4
mt – Malti
Fullscreen: Vimeo
Download: mp4
sl – slovenščina
Fullscreen: Vimeo
Download: mp4
de – Deutsch
Fullscreen: Vimeo
Download: mp4
ga – Gaeilge
Fullscreen: Vimeo
Download: mp4
nl – Nederlands
Fullscreen: Vimeo
Download: mp4
fi – suomi
Fullscreen: Vimeo
Download: mp4
et – eesti
Fullscreen: Vimeo
Download: mp4
it – italiano
Fullscreen: Vimeo
Download: mp4
pl – polski
Fullscreen: Vimeo
Download: mp4
sv – svenska
Fullscreen: Vimeo
Download: mp4
el – ελληνικά
Fullscreen: Vimeo
Download: mp4
lt – lietuvių
Fullscreen: Vimeo
Download: mp4
pt – português
Fullscreen: Vimeo
Download: mp4
Synopsis
Back in 1747, James Lind had never heard about clinical trials!
Lind was a Scottish naval surgeon, and he found himself on a Royal Navy ship full of sailors sick with scurvy. His ideas revolutionised our understanding of how to test which treatment might work best. His work not only saved lives on his ship, but laid the foundation for modern clinical trials (randomised controlled trials) as we know them today.
Every year since 2005, The European Clinical Research Infrastructures Network (ECRIN) has celebrated The International Clinical Trials’ Day (ICTD) at or around the 20th of May (www.ecrin.org ) in order to commemorate the day James Lind started his famous trial (www.jameslindlibrary.org ). ECRAN and ECRIN urge others to take up the habit of celebrating the ICTD.
Browse Key Concepts
Back to Library
GET-IT Jargon Buster
Select a term acceptability
adherence
adverse effect
adverse event
allocation
allocation bias
allocation schedule
allocation schedule concealment
applicability
association
attrition bias
average
average difference
baseline characteristics
before-after study
benefit
bias
blinding
burden
case report
case series
case-control study
causal association
certainty of the evidence
change in cost
cluster
cluster randomized study
cohort study
comparative study
comparing like with like
confidence interval
confidence region
confirmation bias
conflicts of interests
confounders
contamination
controlled before-after study
controlled study
cost
cost-effectiveness
critical assessment
cross-sectional study
crossover study
cut-off value
data collection
data fishing
diagnosis
diagnostic algorithm
diagnostic odds ratio
diagnostic test
diagnostic test accuracy
difference
direct comparison
disease progression bias
disease stage
disease status
double blinding
double dummy
dramatic treatment effect
drug
effect estimate
effectiveness
efficiency
eligibility criteria
enrolment
estimate
evidence
evidence profile
evidence to decision framework
explanatory trial
exploratory analysis
extrapolated evidence
factorial study
fair comparisons of treatments
false negative test result
false negative test result (duplicate)
false positive test result
false positive test result (duplicate)
follow-up
forest plot
GRADE
guideline
high certainty of the evidence
important
imprecision
incidence
inconsistency
incremental cost-effectiveness ratio
indeterminate diagnostic test result
index test
indicator
indirect comparison
indirectness
informed consent
intention-to-treat analysis
interim analysis
interrupted time series study
lead-time bias
length-time bias
level of evidence
likelihood
likelihood ratio
loss to follow-up
low certainty of the evidence
low risk of bias
measurement bias
meta-analysis
minimization
moderate certainty of the evidence
modified intention-to-treat analysis
monitoring
multicentre study
multiple statistical comparisons
natural course of health problems
negative predictive value
nocebo effect
non-random allocation
non-randomized study
number needed to harm
number needed to screen
number needed to treat
objective outcome
odds
odds ratio
outcome
outcome measured on a scale
overdiagnosis
overtreatment
p-value
paired study design for diagnostic tests
parallel group study
peer review
performance bias
perspective
phase 1 trial
phase 2 trial
phase 3 trial
phase 4 trial
PICO
placebo
placebo effect
planned analysis
play of chance
positive predictive value
pragmatic trail
pre-test probability
precision
prevalence
primary outcome
prognosis
prognostic variable
protocol or study plan
qualitative study
quality-adjusted life years
quantitative study
random
random allocation
randomized study
reference standard test
regulation of research
relative effect
reliability
repeated measures study
reporting bias
reproducibility
research
research data
research evidence
research methods
research priorities
resource use
risk of bias
risk ratio
sample
sample size
scale
screening
screening test
secondary outcome
selection criteria
sensitivity
shared decision making
single blinding
single participant trial
smallest important difference
specificity
spin
sponsor bias
statistical power
statistically significant
stratified randomization
strength of recommendation
study
study participants
study population
subgroup
subgroup analysis
summary of findings
surrogate outcome
systematic review
target condition
theory
time horizon
treatment
treatment comparison
treatment comparison group
treatment effect
treatment effect
trial phases
triple blinding
true negative test result
true positive test result
type of study
uncertainty
under-reporting
undesirable effect
unfairness
unit of analysis error
utility value
value
variables
very low certainty of the evidence
yes/no outcomes
About GET-IT
GET-IT provides plain language definitions of health research terms
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it. Ok