ConductScience.org, home

85,013 comparisons from ClinicalTrials.gov.

85,013 comparisons

Most participants first33,758 with no events in either group come last4,061 to 4,080 of 85,013

Show the results as
ComparisonWith the outcomeRisk difference, 95% intervalParticipantsTrial
Depressed in the ED vs Cognitively Impaired in the ED: Depression and Cognitive Impairment at 2 Weeks27 of 803

5 of 808

2.7 points

1.4 to 4.3

1,611NCT00717041

Epidemiology of Depression, Anxiety, and Cognitive Impairment

BuMA Supreme Coronary Stent System (ITT) vs Durable Polymer EES (XIENCE or Promus DES) (ITT): Procedure Success1,042 of 1,074

514 of 537

1.3 points

-0.5 to 3.5

1,611NCT03168776

PIONEER III Trial to Assess Safety and Efficacy of the BuMA Supreme™ Drug Coated Coronary Stent in Patients With Coronary Disease

Rivaroxaban (Xarelto, BAY59-7939) vs Antiplatelet: Number of Participants With Death or First Thromboembolic Event (DTE)68 of 801

63 of 807

0.7 points

-2.0 to 3.4

1,608NCT02556203

Global Study Comparing a rivAroxaban-based Antithrombotic Strategy to an antipLatelet-based Strategy After Transcatheter aortIc vaLve rEplacement to Optimize Clinical Outcomes

Rivaroxaban Arm vs Antiplatelet Arm: deaths from any cause70 of 801

43 of 807

3.4 points

0.9 to 6.0

1,608NCT02556203

Global Study Comparing a rivAroxaban-based Antithrombotic Strategy to an antipLatelet-based Strategy After Transcatheter aortIc vaLve rEplacement to Optimize Clinical Outcomes

Rivaroxaban Arm vs Antiplatelet Arm: serious adverse events296 of 801

282 of 807

2.0 points

-2.7 to 6.7

1,608NCT02556203

Global Study Comparing a rivAroxaban-based Antithrombotic Strategy to an antipLatelet-based Strategy After Transcatheter aortIc vaLve rEplacement to Optimize Clinical Outcomes

Prophylactic NPWT vs Standard Dressing: Number of Participants With Skin Blistering, Erythema, Wound Bleeding (Measures of Adverse Skin Events)46 of 806

5 of 802

5.1 points

3.5 to 6.9

1,608NCT03009110

Preventing Adverse Incisional Outcomes at Cesarean Multicenter Trial

Prophylactic NPWT vs Standard Dressing: Number of Participants With Superficial or Deep Surgical Site Infections (SSIs)29 of 806

27 of 802

0.2 points

-1.6 to 2.1

1,608NCT03009110

Preventing Adverse Incisional Outcomes at Cesarean Multicenter Trial

Prophylactic NPWT vs Standard Dressing: Number of Participants With Superficial, Deep or Organ Space SSIs (Individual Types of SSIs)29 of 806

27 of 802

0.2 points

-1.6 to 2.1

1,608NCT03009110

Preventing Adverse Incisional Outcomes at Cesarean Multicenter Trial

Prophylactic NPWT vs Standard Dressing: Number of Participants With a Composite of Any Wound Complication Including SSI, Hematoma, Seroma, Separation (2cm or More).52 of 806

54 of 802

-0.3 points

-2.7 to 2.2

1,608NCT03009110

Preventing Adverse Incisional Outcomes at Cesarean Multicenter Trial

Prophylactic NPWT vs Standard Dressing: Number of Participants With Wound Hematoma, Seroma, Separation (Other Wound Complications)21 of 806

25 of 802

-0.5 points

-2.2 to 1.2

1,608NCT03009110

Preventing Adverse Incisional Outcomes at Cesarean Multicenter Trial

Prophylactic NPWT vs Standard Dressing: Number of Participants With Organ Space SSIs (Endometritis, Intraabdominal Abscess)2 of 806

2 of 802

-0.0 points

-0.7 to 0.7

1,608NCT03009110

Preventing Adverse Incisional Outcomes at Cesarean Multicenter Trial

Prophylactic NPWT vs Standard Dressing: Number of Participants With Physician Office Visit, Emergency Room Visit, Attendance at Wound Clinic, Use Antibiotics, Hospital Readmission for Wound Related Problems (Measures of Healthcare Resource Utilization)130 of 806

132 of 802

-0.3 points

-3.9 to 3.3

1,608NCT03009110

Preventing Adverse Incisional Outcomes at Cesarean Multicenter Trial

Prophylactic NPWT vs Standard Dressing: serious adverse events4 of 806

5 of 802

-0.1 points

-1.0 to 0.7

1,608NCT03009110

Preventing Adverse Incisional Outcomes at Cesarean Multicenter Trial

Engerix-B® Hepatitis B Vaccination vs Sci-B-Vac® Hepatitis B Vaccination: serious adverse events21 of 811

32 of 796

-1.4 points

-3.3 to 0.3

1,607NCT03393754

Immunogenicity and Safety of Sci-B-Vac® to Engerix-B® in Adults

Treatment Group (Defined in Protocol as Pooled Intervention Group 1 and Intervention Group 2) vs Control Group: Number of Participants Who Developed a New Pressure Ulcer Category 2 or Worse on Any Heel15 of 1,066

10 of 539

-0.4 points

-2.1 to 0.8

1,605NCT03442777

Silicone Adhesive Multilayer Foam Dressings to Prevent Pressure Ulcer

Treatment Group (Defined in Protocol as Pooled Intervention Group 1 and Intervention Group 2) vs Control Group: The Number of Participants Who Developed a New Pressure Ulcer Category 2 or Worse on Any Trochanter1 of 1,066

0 of 539

0.1 points

-0.6 to 0.5

1,605NCT03442777

Silicone Adhesive Multilayer Foam Dressings to Prevent Pressure Ulcer

Treatment Group (Defined in Protocol as Pooled Intervention Group 1 and Intervention Group 2) vs Control Group: Number of Participants Who Developed a New Pressure Ulcer Category 2 or Worse on Sacrum, Heels or Greater Trochanter43 of 1,066

34 of 539

-2.3 points

-4.9 to -0.1

1,605NCT03442777

Silicone Adhesive Multilayer Foam Dressings to Prevent Pressure Ulcer

Treatment Group (Defined in Protocol as Pooled Intervention Group 1 and Intervention Group 2) vs Control Group: Number of Participants Who Developed a New Pressure Ulcer Category 2 or Worse on Sacrum30 of 1,066

26 of 539

-2.0 points

-4.3 to -0.1

1,605NCT03442777

Silicone Adhesive Multilayer Foam Dressings to Prevent Pressure Ulcer

Massive Transfusion Protocol (RBCs, Plasma, Platelets, Whole Blood) vs Early Cryoprecipitate + Massive Transfusion Protocol (RBCs, Plasma, Platelets, Whole Blood): serious adverse events83 of 805

84 of 799

-0.2 points

-3.2 to 2.8

1,604NCT04704869

Early Use of Cryoprecipitate With Major Hemorrhage Protocol (MHP) Activation

Study 1a: Pharmacy-based PrEP Delivery Pilot (13 Months) vs Study 2: Pharmacy-based PrEP Delivery Pilot Extension (6 Months): PrEP Initiation287 of 575

661 of 1,028

-14.4 points

-19.4 to -9.3

1,603NCT04558554

Pharmacy Delivery to Expand the Reach of PrEP in Kenya

Request

GET /api/comparisons/v1

Words from a trial's title, conditions or interventions, its outcome or its groups, or an NCT number.

An outcome counted in participants, the serious adverse events, or the deaths from any cause.

No key needed

Code

Show the call in
curl "https://conductscience.org/api/comparisons/v1?page=204"

Response

The first 2 of this page's 20 results. GET /api/comparisons/v1?page=204

{
  "data": {
    "total": 85013,
    "results": [
      {
        "id": "NCT00717041-e320f201",
        "title": "Depressed in the ED vs Cognitively Impaired in the ED: Depression and Cognitive Impairment at 2 Weeks",
        "summary": "27 of 803 against 5 of 808; risk difference 2.7 points, 95% interval 1.4 to 4.3; NCT00717041, Epidemiology of Depression, Anxiety, and Cognitive Impairment",
        "record": "/library/comparisons/NCT00717041-e320f201",
        "nct_id": "NCT00717041",
        "kind": "outcome",
        "participants": 1611,
        "risk_difference": {
          "value": 0.02743579152435792,
          "lower": 0.014171279442235741,
          "upper": 0.042707383170181856
        },
        "group_1": "27 of 803",
        "group_2": "5 of 808",
        "difference": "2.7 points",
        "interval": "1.4 to 4.3",
        "trial_title": "Epidemiology of Depression, Anxiety, and Cognitive Impairment"
      },
      {
        "id": "NCT03168776-4c8b86e5",
        "title": "BuMA Supreme Coronary Stent System (ITT) vs Durable Polymer EES (XIENCE or Promus DES) (ITT): Procedure Success",
        "summary": "1042 of 1074 against 514 of 537; risk difference 1.3 points, 95% interval -0.5 to 3.5; NCT03168776, PIONEER III Trial to Assess Safety and Efficacy of the BuMA Supreme™ Drug Coated Coronary Stent in Patients With Coronary Disease",
        "record": "/library/comparisons/NCT03168776-4c8b86e5",
        "nct_id": "NCT03168776",
        "kind": "outcome",
        "participants": 1611,
        "risk_difference": {
          "value": 0.013035381750465591,
          "lower": -0.005473762832930797,
          "upper": 0.03537915955357974
        },
        "group_1": "1,042 of 1,074",
        "group_2": "514 of 537",
        "difference": "1.3 points",
        "interval": "-0.5 to 3.5",
        "trial_title": "PIONEER III Trial to Assess Safety and Efficacy of the BuMA Supreme™ Drug Coated Coronary Stent in Patients With Coronary Disease"
      }
    ],
    "no_events": 33758,
    "columns": [
      {
        "key": "title",
        "label": "Comparison"
      },
      {
        "key": "group_1",
        "label": "With the outcome",
        "under": "group_2"
      },
      {
        "key": "difference",
        "label": "Risk difference, 95% interval",
        "under": "interval"
      },
      {
        "key": "participants",
        "label": "Participants"
      },
      {
        "key": "nct_id",
        "label": "Trial",
        "under": "trial_title"
      }
    ],
    "order": "Most participants first",
    "kinds": {
      "all": 85013,
      "outcome": 33568,
      "serious-adverse-events": 31897,
      "deaths": 19548
    }
  },
  "release": "trial-comparisons-2026-03-23-0.1.0",
  "terms": [
    {
      "source": "ClinicalTrials.gov's posted results, through CTTI's AACT",
      "license": "ClinicalTrials.gov data via Aggregate Analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov (AACT), CTTI. CTTI makes its materials freely available and requests acknowledgement. https://aact.ctti-clinicaltrials.org/documentation/299",
      "notice": "ClinicalTrials.gov's data carry an international copyright outside the United States: https://clinicaltrials.gov/about-site/terms-conditions. The measures are ConductScience's calculation from them.",
      "short": "Freely available. Acknowledgement requested"
    },
    {
      "source": "ClinicalTrials.gov",
      "license": "none stated",
      "notice": "ClinicalTrials.gov's data carry an international copyright outside the United States: https://clinicaltrials.gov/about-site/terms-conditions. The measures are ConductScience's calculation from them.",
      "short": "No license stated"
    }
  ],
  "next": "/api/comparisons/v1?page=205",
  "request_id": "VI-jAC5C7efCv8Ow"
}

Ask about these results. The first 10 go in the prompt.

About this data
Holds
85,013 comparisons
From ClinicalTrials.gov. Counted 10 Nov 2026.
Release
23 Mar 2026
trial-comparisons-2026-03-23-0.1.0
Checked
20 of 20 review comparisons traced to ClinicalTrials.gov, and all 510,078 numbers calculated again apart from the builder agree
Access
Open
No account. 60 calls a minute from one address.

Sources 2

  • ClinicalTrials.gov's posted results, through CTTI's AACTFreely available. Acknowledgement requested
  • ClinicalTrials.govNo license stated
Each source's terms
  • ClinicalTrials.gov's posted results, through CTTI's AACTClinicalTrials.gov data via Aggregate Analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov (AACT), CTTI. CTTI makes its materials freely available and requests acknowledgement. https://aact.ctti-clinicaltrials.org/documentation/299
  • ClinicalTrials.govnone stated

ClinicalTrials.gov's data carry an international copyright outside the United States: https://clinicaltrials.gov/about-site/terms-conditions. The measures are ConductScience's calculation from them.

Genes

NCBI Gene

One gene with its proteins, patents, drugs, trials, grants and papers.

Trials

ClinicalTrials.gov

Search clinical trials by condition, drug, outcome or NCT number, with the results each one posted.

Sequences

Patent publications

Paste a sequence and see the patents that disclose it.

Opens sequences.conductscience.org

For software

Read Trial comparisons from software.

Every answer on this page is also JSON, under /api/comparisons/v1. No key.

GET https://conductscience.org/api/comparisons/v1?q=placebo%20heart%20failure&kind=outcome

Ask an assistant

  • In FOURIER, how did serious adverse events compare between evolocumab and placebo?
  • Which metformin trials reported deaths, and what was the risk difference?
  • What was the number needed to treat for HELIOS-B's composite outcome?
  • Which placebo-controlled heart failure trials had the most participants?