Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 24, 2026

An Immature Murine Model of Reversible Unilateral Ureteral Obstruction
Published on: April 4, 2025
Urological trials without significant results. Can we extract meaning from disappointment?
Darcy Noll1,2, Peter Stapleton1,2, Michael O'Callaghan1,3,4
1Discipline of Medicine, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.
Objective:
To calculate additional information from urological trials which do not report statistically significant results, and assess whether language manipulation is used when such studies were reported.
Materials And Methods:
Many randomised controlled trials (RCTs) do not yield statistically significant primary outcomes; such results are challenging to interpret using traditional statistical practices. An alternative approach, the likelihood ratio (LR), uses Bayesian statistical methods to compare the null (no significant effect of treatment) and alternative (significant effect of treatment) hypotheses, and provides quantitative strength of evidence for one compared to the other. A lower LR indicates stronger support for the alternate hypothesis over the null and vice versa. We performed a cross-sectional review of urological RCTs, published in the period 2018-2024, with a primary outcome that did not reach statistical significance. For each outcome, an LR was calculated. For each included article the use of language manipulation ('spin') was also analysed.
Results:
Eighty-two articles with 98 primary outcomes were identified. For 13% of these outcomes the data provided greater support for the alternative hypothesis compared to the null, as indicated by an LR < 1. This suggests these trials, such as the EVEREST trial (LR = 0.26), should be considered for further investigation. For 36% of results the LR was >100, indicating decisive evidence in favour of the null hypothesis, and suggesting these trials, including SWOG S1011 (LR = 250), need not be repeated. Spin was identified in 41.5% of abstracts. After adjustment, only impact factor and LR <1 were associated with spin use. This study was limited by its analysis of only articles published in high impact factor journals in the past 7 years.
Conclusions:
Many urological RCTs with primary outcomes that were not statistically significant by traditional measures warrant further investigation. Researchers should apply the LR to future trials to aid interpretation of their results.
More Related Videos
04:53A Clinical Trial Assessing the Safety, Efficacy, and Delivery of Olive-Oil-Based Three-Chamber Bags for Parenteral Nutrition
Published on: September 20, 2019
05:34A Mouse Model to Evaluate the Long-Term Structural and Functional Outcomes after the Reversal of Prolonged Unilateral Ureteric Obstruction
Published on: July 18, 2025
Related Concept Videos
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Regression Toward the Mean
Guidelines for Writing Outcome
Patient outcomes reflect the patient's response to the goal rather than what the nurse aims to achieve. Terminology should be observable and measurable to avoid the reader's interpretation. The desired outcome should be realistic and achievable in the designated care timeframe. Expected outcomes should align with adjunctive therapies. The outcome should enhance care...
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Clinical Trials: Overview
Negative and Cognitive Symptoms of Schizophrenia
Negative Symptoms
Negative symptoms of schizophrenia manifest as deficits in normal emotional and behavioral functioning, profoundly impacting daily life. Individuals with schizophrenia often display a flat affect, characterized by a near-total absence of emotional expression,...