ConductScience.org, home

85,013 comparisons from ClinicalTrials.gov.

85,013 comparisons

Most participants first33,758 with no events in either group come last4,481 to 4,500 of 85,013

Show the results as
ComparisonWith the outcomeRisk difference, 95% intervalParticipantsTrial
Transitional Tobacco Care Management (TTCM) vs eReferral to State Tobacco Quitline (QL): Self-reported Continuous Tobacco Abstinence Since Hospital Discharge120 of 706

91 of 703

4.1 points

0.3 to 7.8

1,409NCT03603496

Post-Discharge Smoking Cessation Strategies: Helping HAND 4

Transitional Tobacco Care Management (TTCM) vs eReferral to State Tobacco Quitline (QL): Tobacco Abstinence, Biochemically Confirmed110 of 706

96 of 703

1.9 points

-1.8 to 5.6

1,409NCT03603496

Post-Discharge Smoking Cessation Strategies: Helping HAND 4

Transitional Tobacco Care Management (TTCM) vs eReferral to State Tobacco Quitline (QL): deaths from any cause19 of 706

24 of 703

-0.7 points

-2.6 to 1.1

1,409NCT03603496

Post-Discharge Smoking Cessation Strategies: Helping HAND 4

CADe Device vs Colonoscopy (Standard of Care): Serrated Lesions Detection Rate (SLDR)219 of 713

156 of 694

8.2 points

3.6 to 12.8

1,407NCT05275556

Gastroenterology Artificial INtelligence System for Detecting Colorectal Polyps (The GAIN Study)

CADe Device vs Colonoscopy (Standard of Care): Adenoma Detection Rate Including Carcinoma (ADR*)307 of 713

271 of 694

4.0 points

-1.1 to 9.1

1,407NCT05275556

Gastroenterology Artificial INtelligence System for Detecting Colorectal Polyps (The GAIN Study)

CADe Device vs Colonoscopy (Standard of Care): Advanced Adenoma Detection Rate (aADR)59 of 713

60 of 694

-0.4 points

-3.3 to 2.6

1,407NCT05275556

Gastroenterology Artificial INtelligence System for Detecting Colorectal Polyps (The GAIN Study)

CADe Device vs Colonoscopy (Standard of Care): Polyp Detection Rate (PDR)425 of 713

364 of 694

7.2 points

2.0 to 12.3

1,407NCT05275556

Gastroenterology Artificial INtelligence System for Detecting Colorectal Polyps (The GAIN Study)

CADe Device vs Colonoscopy (Standard of Care): Flat Adenoma Detection Rate (fADR)21 of 713

19 of 694

0.2 points

-1.6 to 2.0

1,407NCT05275556

Gastroenterology Artificial INtelligence System for Detecting Colorectal Polyps (The GAIN Study)

CADe Device vs Colonoscopy (Standard of Care): Proximal Adenoma Detection Rate (pADR)236 of 713

198 of 694

4.6 points

-0.3 to 9.4

1,407NCT05275556

Gastroenterology Artificial INtelligence System for Detecting Colorectal Polyps (The GAIN Study)

CADe Device vs Colonoscopy (Standard of Care): Small Adenoma Detection Rate (sADR)236 of 713

201 of 694

4.1 points

-0.7 to 8.9

1,407NCT05275556

Gastroenterology Artificial INtelligence System for Detecting Colorectal Polyps (The GAIN Study)

Rituximab+Chemotherapy vs Obinutuzumab+Chemotherapy: serious adverse events269 of 701

312 of 702

-6.1 points

-11.2 to -0.9

1,403NCT01287741

A Study of Obinutuzumab in Combination With CHOP Chemotherapy Versus Rituximab With CHOP in Participants With CD20-Positive Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (GOYA)

CB-5945 vs Placebo: serious adverse events40 of 703

36 of 700

0.5 points

-1.9 to 3.0

1,403NCT01696643

Safety Study of CB-5945 for the Treatment of Opioid-Induced Constipation

Sotagliflozin 400 mg vs Placebo: deaths from any cause1 of 699

0 of 703

0.1 points

-0.4 to 0.8

1,402NCT02531035

A Phase 3 Study to Evaluate the Safety of Sotagliflozin in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes Who Have Inadequate Glycemic Control With Insulin Therapy Alone

Sotagliflozin 400 mg vs Placebo: serious adverse events48 of 699

23 of 703

3.6 points

1.3 to 6.0

1,402NCT02531035

A Phase 3 Study to Evaluate the Safety of Sotagliflozin in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes Who Have Inadequate Glycemic Control With Insulin Therapy Alone

Pembrolizumab/Vibostolimab vs Pembrolizumab: deaths from any cause6 of 701

1 of 701

0.7 points

-0.1 to 1.7

1,402NCT05665595

A Study of Adjuvant Pembrolizumab/Vibostolimab (MK-7684A) Versus Pembrolizumab for Resected High-Risk Melanoma in Participants With High-Risk Stage II-IV Melanoma (MK-7684A-010/KEYVIBE-010)

Short Storage vs Standard Issue: Organ Dysfunction129 of 669

133 of 732

1.1 points

-3.0 to 5.2

1,401NCT01977547

Age of Blood in Children in Pediatric Intensive Care Units

qHPV Vaccine in Base Study vs qHPV Vaccine in Extension Study: Number of Participants Reporting SAEs From Month 18 Through Month 370 of 923

3 of 477

-0.6 points

-1.8 to -0.0

1,400NCT00092547

A Study of Gardasil (V501) in Preadolescents and Adolescents (V501-018)

GeneSight Psychotropic Tested vs Treatment As Usual: serious adverse events3 of 681

2 of 717

0.2 points

-0.6 to 1.0

1,398NCT02109939

Genomics Used to Improve DEpression Decisions

MiStent® vs XIENCE EES: All-cause Death25 of 703

18 of 695

1.0 points

-0.9 to 2.9

1,398NCT02385279

Study Comparing the MiStent SES Versus the XIENCE EES Stent

MiStent® vs XIENCE EES: Myocardial Infarction17 of 703

15 of 695

0.3 points

-1.4 to 1.9

1,398NCT02385279

Study Comparing the MiStent SES Versus the XIENCE EES Stent

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=225"

Response

The first 2 of this page's 20 results. GET /api/comparisons/v1?page=225

{
  "data": {
    "total": 85013,
    "results": [
      {
        "id": "NCT03603496-c8143564",
        "title": "Transitional Tobacco Care Management (TTCM) vs eReferral to State Tobacco Quitline (QL): Self-reported Continuous Tobacco Abstinence Since Hospital Discharge",
        "summary": "120 of 706 against 91 of 703; risk difference 4.1 points, 95% interval 0.3 to 7.8; NCT03603496, Post-Discharge Smoking Cessation Strategies: Helping HAND 4",
        "record": "/library/comparisons/NCT03603496-c8143564",
        "nct_id": "NCT03603496",
        "kind": "outcome",
        "participants": 1409,
        "risk_difference": {
          "value": 0.04052643667970937,
          "lower": 0.003223483985579513,
          "upper": 0.07779994484278108
        },
        "group_1": "120 of 706",
        "group_2": "91 of 703",
        "difference": "4.1 points",
        "interval": "0.3 to 7.8",
        "trial_title": "Post-Discharge Smoking Cessation Strategies: Helping HAND 4"
      },
      {
        "id": "NCT03603496-d648a4ac",
        "title": "Transitional Tobacco Care Management (TTCM) vs eReferral to State Tobacco Quitline (QL): Tobacco Abstinence, Biochemically Confirmed",
        "summary": "110 of 706 against 96 of 703; risk difference 1.9 points, 95% interval -1.8 to 5.6; NCT03603496, Post-Discharge Smoking Cessation Strategies: Helping HAND 4",
        "record": "/library/comparisons/NCT03603496-d648a4ac",
        "nct_id": "NCT03603496",
        "kind": "outcome",
        "participants": 1409,
        "risk_difference": {
          "value": 0.019249755197272705,
          "lower": -0.017737063109584873,
          "upper": 0.0562184271773521
        },
        "group_1": "110 of 706",
        "group_2": "96 of 703",
        "difference": "1.9 points",
        "interval": "-1.8 to 5.6",
        "trial_title": "Post-Discharge Smoking Cessation Strategies: Helping HAND 4"
      }
    ],
    "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=226",
  "request_id": "tBEeWtTxfA9ZRb1r"
}

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

Instruments

The conductscience.com catalog

One instrument from the ConductScience store with the tests, measures and species it is used for, the papers that used it, and the MeSH topics of those papers.

Drugs and targets

Open Targets

One drug with its targets, the diseases it is studied for, and the trials that name it, with their comparisons, papers and cognitive tests.

Diseases

Open Targets

One disease with the drugs studied for it, the targets those drugs act on, and the trials that study it, with their comparisons and papers.

Companies

ClinicalTrials.gov

One company with the trials it leads or helps run, the drugs those trials test, the conditions they study and the organizations it runs them with.

Cell lines

Cellosaurus

One cell line with the problems Cellosaurus records for it, its relatives, the cell banks that hold it, and the papers that used it.

Journal index

PubMed and NLM's journal list

One journal with its papers in PubMed since 1959, year by year, its retracted papers, errata and expressions of concern, and how many of its papers have a copy in PMC.

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?