English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Patients with progressive neurodegenerative diseases often pursue trial entry seeking to access cutting edge therapies. However, cutting edge therapies for neurodegenerative diseases tend to have higher adverse event rates and underperform placebo. This essay argues that patients seeking trial entry are probably better off, medically, by being assigned to the placebo arm. Because trials involve extra clinic visits and research procedures, patients may be still better off medically by skipping trial participation altogether. I close by arguing that the Neurology research community might better honor the contributions of research subjects by pressing sponsors to promptly publish the results of non-positive trials, minimizing the use of uneven randomization ratios that favor assignment to the investigational treatment, and by fostering systematic collection of data on the risk/benefit balance of trial participation.

Better to be in The Placebo Arm for Trials of Neurological Therapies?