Skip to main content


Table 2 Statements regarding pragmatic trials by funding agencies

From: Stakeholder views regarding ethical issues in the design and conduct of pragmatic trials: study protocol

Agency Year Definition of pragmatic trial
Canadian Institutes of Health Research (Canada) 2016 "[innovative Clinical Trials (iCT)] methods can reduce the cost of conducting trials, reduce the amount of time needed to answer research questions, and increase the relevance of research findings to patients, health care providers and policy makers. Adopting these alternative designs can maximize the use of existing knowledge and data. Some examples of iCTs include: Pragmatic trials [...];"
Medical Research Council (UK) 2018 “Effectiveness Trials - Studies designed to produce research information about the effectiveness, costs, and broader impact of health technologies for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS are supported by the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme, funded by NIHR and managed by NETCC.”
NCCIH (US) 2017 “The projects must be pragmatic trials rather than explanatory trials. […]
The Collaboratory supports pragmatic trials. A pragmatic trial is primarily designed to determine the effects of an intervention under the usual, real-world conditions in which it will be applied. The approach, including study design, is kept as simple as possible without sacrificing scientific rigor.”
PCORI (US) 2018 “[…] applicants should design trials so that they address practical comparative questions faced by patients and clinicians—to include broader and more diverse populations—and can be conducted in real-world clinical and diverse health-system settings. Such trials are often referred to as “pragmatic clinical trials” because they are intended to provide information that healthcare providers can adopt directly.”