Estimating comparative effectiveness using Single-Arm trials: A challenge in the field of agnosticism

Although single-arm trials (SATs) can serve as a pivotal study design for evaluating drug efficacy in specific scenarios, they are accompanied by inherent limitations and challenges. This paper explores the challenges of validity, reliability, statistical power, and the use of external control in SATs from a statistical perspective. We reflect on the rationale for employing SATs to support efficacy assessments, and provide recommendations based on their limitations and potential biases. The objective is to offer guidance for the improved design and implementation of SATs in future research.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Medical Research Methodology
Published
2025-10-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-025-02660-9
Primary Topic
Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Estimating comparative effectiveness using Single-Arm trials: A challenge in the field of agnosticism

M. Lu, Hongwei Kan, Shang Cao, Jianguo Pan
BMC Medical Research Methodology
Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
article

Estimating comparative effectiveness using Single-Arm trials: A challenge in the field of agnosticism

M. Lu, Hongwei Kan, Shang Cao, Jianguo Pan
article en

Abstract

Although single-arm trials (SATs) can serve as a pivotal study design for evaluating drug efficacy in specific scenarios, they are accompanied by inherent limitations and challenges. This paper explores the challenges of validity, reliability, statistical power, and the use of external control in SATs from a statistical perspective. We reflect on the rationale for employing SATs to support efficacy assessments, and provide recommendations based on their limitations and potential biases. The objective is to offer guidance for the improved design and implementation of SATs in future research.

BMC Medical Research MethodologyVol. 25(1)
National Medical Products Administration (CN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 72%
Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.