An assessment of the quality of randomised controlled trials conducted in China

Globalization of clinical trials in oncology: a worldwide quantitative analysis

BACKGROUND

Over the past two decades, the globalization of oncology clinical trials has expanded, yet significant disparities persist across countries. This study aimed to evaluate these geographical inequalities, the evolution of trial phases, and the adherence to ethical standards according to the World Bank's income group.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The ClinicalTrials.gov database was searched and recorded in June 2024. We analyzed data from 87 748 oncology clinical trials conducted between 2000 and 2021, across high-income (HICs), upper-middle-income (UMICs), lower-middle-income (LMICs), and low-income countries. Key metrics included trial density, funding sources, registration timing, and trial phase distribution.

RESULTS

The number of oncology trials increased significantly, with a mean absolute annual rise of 266.6 trials, with China currently being the leading site of early- and validation-phase trials. While HICs still present the highest trial densities, UMICs showed a notable increase in early-phase trials, reflecting a shift in research dynamics. However, despite these advances, 76.4% of countries still had no new trials initiated by 2024. Additionally, ethical practices saw improvement from 2005 to 2021 with an increase in pre-commencement registration (from 9.2% to 58%, P < 0.0001), and more validation-phase trials with a survival variable as the primary outcome (from 40% to 59.6%, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the growth in oncology clinical trials, significant disparities in trial distribution and access remain, especially in LMICs. Continued investments in research infrastructure and adherence to ethical standards are crucial to ensure that clinical research benefits are equitably distributed, particularly in regions with the greatest need for advanced cancer therapies.

Effects of Trazodone on Sleep: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Sleep problems and insomnia are common, challenging to treat, and transcend specific diagnoses. Although trazodone is a popular choice, robust meta-analytic evidence is lacking. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigates the efficacy and safety of trazodone for sleep disturbances, reflecting recent updates in insomnia diagnosis and treatment.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, APA PsycINFO, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) up to 1 May 2024, for Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) comparing trazodone with placebo and reporting sleep-related outcomes. The minimum pharmacotherapy duration was 5 days. Included were all RCTs regardless of blinding (open-label or single- or double-blind), while quasi-randomized studies were excluded. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomized Trials assessed bias. Analyses used a random-effects model on an intention-to-treat (ITT) basis. Risk ratio (RR) was used for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean difference (WMD) for continuous outcomes. When different units or scales were used, Hedge's adjusted g standardized mean difference (SMD) was calculated. Subgroup and preplanned sensitivity analyses explored heterogeneity and evaluated findings' strength and consistency.

RESULTS

In total, 44 RCTs with 3935 participants were included. Trazodone did not significantly impact subjective total sleep time (TST) [WMD = 0.73 min, 95% confidence interval (CI) - 24.62; 26.07, p = 0.96] but improved sleep quality (SQ) (SMD = - 0.58, 95% CI - 0.87; - 0.28, p < 0.01) and secondary outcomes. These included the number of nocturnal awakenings (SMD = - 0.57, 95% CI - 0.85; - 0.30], p < 0.01), nocturnal time awake after sleep onset (WMD = - 13.47 min, 95% CI - 23.09; - 3.86], p < 0.01), objective TST by polysomnography (WMD = 27.98 min, 95% CI 4.02; 51.95, p = 0.02), and sleep efficiency (WMD = 3.32, 95% CI 0.53; 1.57, p = 0.02). Tolerability issues included more dropouts owing to adverse effects (RR = 2.30, 95% CI 1.45; 3.64, p < 0.01), any sleep-related adverse effects (RR = 3.67, 95% CI 1.07; 12.47, p = 0.04), more adverse effects in general (RR = 1.18, 95% CI 1.03; 1.33, p = 0.02), and more sleep-related adverse effects (RR = 4.31, 95% CI 2.29; 8.13, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Trazodone extends total sleep time but does not affect perceived sleep duration. It may improve sleep quality and continuity but has minor effects on sleep latency, efficiency, and daytime impairment. Trazodone is associated with adverse effects, necessitating a careful risk-benefit assessment. Limited data restrict generalizability, underscoring the need for more research.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration number,CRD42022383121.

Pharmacotherapy for sleep disturbances in post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD): A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Sleep disturbances are an important symptom dimension of post-traumatic-stress-disorder (PTSD). There is no meta-analytic evidence examining the effects of all types of pharmacotherapy on sleep outcomes among patients with PTSD.

METHODS

Medline/Embase/PsychInfo/CENTRAL/clinicaltrials.gov/ICTRP, reference lists of published reviews and all included studies were searched for Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) examining any pharmacotherapy vs. placebo or any other drug among patients with PTSD.

PRIMARY OUTCOMES

total sleep time, nightmares, sleep quality.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

sleep onset latency, number of nocturnal awakenings, time spent awake following sleep onset, dropouts due to sleep-related adverse-effects, insomnia/somnolence/vivid-dreams as adverse-effects. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were performed.

RESULTS

99 RCTs with 10,481 participants were included. Prazosin may be the most effective treatment for insomnia (SMD = -0.88, 95%CI = [-1.22;-0.54], nightmares (SMD = -0.44, 95%CI = [-0.84;-0.04]) and poor sleep quality (SMD = -0.55, 95%CI = [-1.01;-0.10]). Evidence is scarce and indicates lack of efficacy for SSRIs, Mirtazapine, z-drugs and benzodiazepines, which are widely used in daily practice. Risperidone and Quetiapine carry a high risk of causing somnolence without having a clear therapeutic benefit. Hydroxyzine, Trazodone, Nabilone, Paroxetine and MDMA-assisted psychotherapy may be promising options, but more research is needed.

CONCLUSIONS

Underpowered individual comparisons and very-low to moderate confidence in effect estimates hinder the generalisability of the results. More RCTs, specifically reporting on sleep-related outcomes, are urgently needed.

Antimanic Efficacy, Tolerability, and Acceptability of Clonazepam: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

(1) Background: The use of benzodiazepines for the treatment of acute mania remains prevalent. This systematic review and meta-analysis provides an updated assessment of Clonazepam's antimanic efficacy, tolerability, and acceptability. (2) Methods: A systematic search of multiple databases and clinical trial registries was conducted, aiming to identify any controlled studies of Clonazepam vs. placebo or any other pharmacotherapy for the treatment of acute mania. Pairwise meta-analytic evaluations were performed. (3) Results: Six studies were included with a total number of 192 participants, all of which were randomized controlled trials. Clonazepam may be superior to a placebo in the acute phase of treatment and no different to Lithium and Haloperidol in terms of efficacy, both acutely and in the medium to long term. Clonazepam may be an acceptable and well-tolerated treatment for acute mania, especially when used as an augmentation strategy. Comparisons were underpowered, with minimal sample sizes and only one study per comparison in many cases, thus limiting the generalizability of our findings and hindering firm clinical conclusions. (4) Conclusions: Given the prevalence of benzodiazepine use in current practice, more and larger studies are urgently needed.

Systematic review and pooled analysis of randomized controlled trials in countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC): Methods and quality assessment

OBJECTIVES

To describe variations in characteristics of randomized controlled trials conducted in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries, and critically appraising the quality of design, conduct and analysis of the trials.

METHODS

We carried out a systematically comprehensive electronic search of articles published between 1990 and 2018 and indexed in several databases: i) MEDLINE/PubMed, ii) EMBASE, iii) Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), iv) ClinicalTrials.gov, and v) World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We summarized the overall risk of bias present in all analyzed studies using the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool (CCRBT).

RESULTS

A remarkable shift in numbers of publications from 2006 onwards was found. The largest number of publications were from Saudi Arabia and consisted of hospitals/clinics based studies. Lack of randomization was found in the majority of reports, and nearly three-fourth of the studies involved the use of intention-to-treat (ITT) principle. However, the proportion of adequately generated random sequence methods has increased yearly, and this increase accounted for a relatively large proportion over the latter half of the studied period (p<0.001), in contrast to the proportion of allocation concealment and blinding. Journal impact factor was significantly correlated with the quality of random sequence generation (r=0.145; p=0.014).

CONCLUSION

The randomization methods have gained more attention over the last 3 decades. Secondly, Journal impact factor can serve as an indicator of randomization quality. To mitigate the large rate of overall high risk of bias in GCC studies, high-quality trials must be considered by ensuring adequate allocation concealment and blinding methods. PROSPERO No. ID: CRD42022310331.

Research methodology in acupuncture and moxibustion for managing primary dysmenorrhea: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Acupuncture and moxibustion have promising effects in managing primary dysmenorrhea. However, some evidence from clinical trials remains controversial due to methodological flaws in study designs that involve acupuncture and its related modalities and require urgent attention and dialogue.

METHODS

Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), Cochrane Library, Excerpta Medica database (EMBASE), PubMed, Web of Sciences, Chinese Biological Medicine (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP Database for Chinese Technical Periodicals (VIP), and Wanfang database were searched from their inception to July 2021. Data were extracted based on the types of study design, primary outcome measures, adverse events (AEs), and participants' subjective views.

RESULTS

Most studies (n = 282, 93 %) were published in Chinese and 21 (7 %) in English. Among these, there were 209 (69 %) randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 39 (13 %) non-randomized controlled trials (nRCTs), 30 (10 %) case-series reports, 15 (5 %) cohort studies, and 10 (3 %) case reports. The most frequent reported outcome was pain, followed by emotion, sleeping quality, quality of life, skin temperature, changes in brain function, uterine and ovarian blood flow, and reproductive endocrine level. AEs were reported in 37 studies with mild events, and all recovered without actions taken; 31 trials reported no AEs; 235 failed to report any AEs. One RCT found that the satisfaction rate of the intervention group was statistically significantly higher than the control group.

CONCLUSION

Clinical studies on acupuncture and its related modalities face methodological challenges and require urgent attention. RCT with blinding and sham control might be the gold standard trial design. However, it may not be the most suitable research method for these modalities. We recommend using pragmatic RCTs in this field, where trial protocol registration on the trial registry platforms and detailed safety reporting should be mandatory.

Assessment of the quality of randomized controlled trials in surgery using Jadad score: Where do we stand?

Introduction

Quality assessment of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is important to prevent clinical application of erroneous results.

Materials and Methods

This was an assessment of published RCTs in surgical subspecialties during 2011-2018 based on MEDLINE and EMBASE search. The primary objective of the present study was to quantitatively and qualitatively analyze the RCTs published from India based on year of publication, geographical distribution, and subspecialty using the modified Jadad score (high quality if score is ≥3; or ≥2 if blinded design was not feasible). Its secondary objective was to identify factors affecting the quality of RCTs.

Results

Among 1304 trials identified, 162 were analyzed. Of these 96 (59%) had a score of ≥3; and 104 (64.2%) were of high quality (score ≥2). Year-wise there was no significant quantitative (P = 0.329) or qualitative (P = 0.255) variation. Geographic regions had similar quantity (P = 0.206) and quality (P = 0.068). The RCTs among subspecialties too were comparable in quantity and quality. Higher impact factor of journal (P = 0.013) and assessment by Institute Review Board (IRB) (P = 0.004) were significantly associated with a better study quality. Type of institution, number of authors, centricity, assistance by a statistician, and source of funding did not affect the quality of RCTs.

Conclusions

: The quantity and quality of surgical RCTs were stable and comparable over the years and across geographical regions and subspecialties. Higher impact factor of journal and review by IRB were significantly associated with a better study quality.

Participation of Lower and Upper Middle-Income Countries in Clinical Trials Led by High-Income Countries

Importance

Many randomized clinical trials (RCTs) led by high-income countries (HICs) now enroll patients from lower middle-income countries (LMICs) and upper middle-income countries (UMICs). Although enrolling diverse populations promotes research collaborations, there are issues regarding which countries participate in RCTs and how this participation may contribute to global research.

Objective

To describe which UMICs and LMICs participate in RCTs led by HICs.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A cross-sectional study of all oncology RCTs published globally during January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2017, was conducted. The study cohort was restricted to RCTs led by HICs that enrolled participants from LMICs and UMICs. Study analyses were conducted in November 1, 2021, to May 31, 2022.

Main Outcomes and Measures

A bibliometric approach (Web of Science 2007-2017) was used to explore whether RCT participation was proportional to other measures of cancer research activity. Participation in RCTs (ie, percentage of RCTs in the cohort in which each LMIC and UMIC participated) was compared with country-level cancer research bibliometric output (ie, percentage of total cancer research bibliometric output from the same group of countries that came from a specific LMIC and UMIC).

Results

Among the 636 HIC-led RCTs, 186 trials (29%) enrolled patients in LMICs (n = 84 trials involving 11 LMICs) and/or UMICs (n = 181 trials involving 26 UMICs). The most common participating LMICs were India (42 [50%]), Ukraine (39 [46%]), Philippines (23 [27%]), and Egypt (12 [14%]). The most common participating UMICs were Russia (115 [64%]), Brazil (94 [52%]), Romania (62 [34%]), China (56 [31%]), Mexico (56 [31%]), and South Africa (54 [30%]). Several LMICs are overrepresented in the cohort of RCTs based on proportional cancer research bibliometric output: Ukraine (46% of RCTs but 2% of cancer research bibliometric output), Philippines (27% RCTs, 1% output), and Georgia (8% RCTs, 0.2% output). Overrepresented UMICs include Russia (64% RCTs, 2% output), Romania (34% RCTs, 2% output), Mexico (31% RCTs, 2% output), and South Africa (30% RCTs, 1% output).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cross-sectional study, a substantial proportion of RCTs led by HICs enrolled patients in LMICs and UMICs. The LMICs and UMICs that participated in these trials did not match overall cancer bibliometric output as a surrogate for research ecosystem maturity. Reasons for this apparent discordance and how these data may inform future capacity-strengthening activities require further study.

Systematic review on the quality of randomized controlled trials from Saudi Arabia

Background

The quality of randomized controlled trials from Saudi Arabia is unknown since most are observational studies.

Objective

To determine (1) the quantity and quality of randomized controlled trials published from Saudi Arabia, and (2) whether significance of intervention effect varied by study quality.

Methods

PubMed, SCOPUS, and Cochrane were searched with keywords for trials published from Saudi Arabia until February 2018. A total of 422 records were identified and screened, resulting in 61 eligible trials for analysis. Two researchers abstracted trial characteristics and assessed quality in seven domains (randomization, allocation concealment, blinding of assessors or participants, incomplete outcome data, selective reporting, and other sources of bias) using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool.

Results

A majority of the trials (57%) were published during 2010–2018. High risk of bias was present for blinding (outcome: 13%; participants and personnel: 28%). Biases could not be assessed due to lack of information (unclear risk) in the domains of randomization (54%), allocation concealment (44%), and blinding of outcome assessment (57%). When all seven domains were considered together (summary risk of bias), 0% of the trials had low risk, 39% had high risk, and 61% had unclear risk of biases. A greater proportion of high-risk trials had significant intervention effect than unclear-risk trials (79% vs. 67%).

Conclusion

The volume and quality of trials in Saudi Arabia was low. More high-quality randomized controlled trials are warranted to address chronic diseases.

Compound salvia pellet might be more effective and safer for chronic stable angina pectoris compared with nitrates: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Chronic stable angina (CSA) resulted in a considerable burden for both individuals and the society. In this study we aimed to critically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of Compound salvia pellet compared with nitrates in the treatment of Chronic Stable Angina (CSA) pectoris, and to provide more credible evidence for clinical practice.

METHODS

A comprehensive and exhaustive search strategy was formulated to identify potential RCTs of compound salvia pellet for CSA in international and Chinese databases from their inception to July 4th, 2018. We also searched the bibliographies of relevant studies. Two reviewers independently assessed the quality of included trials by using Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 1849 citations and 51 RCTs (n = 4732) were included for meta-analysis after titles, abstracts and full text selection according to eligibility criteria. The pooled results suggested that compound salvia pellet was much more effective than nitrates in the improvement of angina symptoms (therapy = 4 weeks, RR = 1.23, 95%CI = [1.17, 1.30], P < .001, I = 0%; therapy = 4 weeks, RR = 1.13, 95%CI = [1.08, 1.17], P < .001, I = 45.6%), and ECG test (therapy = 4 weeks, RR = 1.24, 95%CI [1.14, 1.35], P < .001, I = 51.5%; and therapy > 4 weeks, RR = 1.30, 95%CI[1.20, 1.42], P < .001, I = 36.4%) in CSA. Compared with nitrates, the percentage of patients with adverse events significantly decreased when prescribed with compound salvia pellet (3.2% vs 17.0%).

CONCLUSION

Compound salvia pellet might be more effective on the improvement of angina symptoms, ECG test and with few adverse events compared with nitrates. While there are some limitations in this study, which may weaken the results, we believe the findings could provide useful information for stakeholders concerned with outcomes in patients with CSA. More rigorous RCTs with high quality are needed to confirm these findings.

Traditional Chinese herbal medicine for vascular dementia

BACKGROUND

Traditional Chinese herbal medicine (TCHM) is widely used for treating vascular dementia (VaD) in China. Recent studies of a number of TCHMs have demonstrated in vitro biological activity and therapeutic effects in animals, but the published clinical evidence has not been systematically appraised.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of TCHMs listed in either the Chinese Pharmacopoeia (CP) or the Chinese National Essential Drug List (NEDL) that are used to treat VaD. A secondary aim was to identify promising TCHMs for further clinical research.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched ALOIS, the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's Specialised Register (on 14 March 2018) and also several Chinese biomedical databases: the Chinese Biological Medicine Database (January 1979 to May 2015), Wanfang database (January 1998 to May 2015), Chongqing VIP Information Co. Ltd or Weipu (January 1998 to May 2015) and the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (January 1979 to May 2015).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of TCHMs compared to placebo, to Western medicine (WM) or to routine therapy for VaD risk factors. Eligible participants were men and women aged 18 years and above, diagnosed with VaD by any of the following four criteria: (1) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) versions III, III-R, IV, IV-TR; (2) National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS-AIREN); (3) International Classification of Diseases 9 or 10; (4) the Hachinski or the Modified Hachinski Ischaemic Score. We required the use of an imaging technique to differentiate VaD from other dementias. We excluded (1) trials with participants diagnosed with mixed dementia or those that did not use an imaging technique to ascertain VaD; (2) trials of NEDL-listed Gingko biloba or Huperzine A as experimental interventions, to avoid duplication of existing Cochrane Reviews; (3) trials using acupuncture alone as the experimental intervention; (4) trials using another CP- or NEDL-listed TCHM (except for Huperzine A and Gingko which are popular in Western practice) as the control intervention; and (5) trials using purely non-pharmacological interventions as the control intervention unless explicitly described as 'routine therapy for VaD risk factors'.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We assessed the risks of bias using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool and adapted the Outcome Reporting Bias in Trials (ORBIT) classification system for outcome reporting bias. We assessed TCHM effects on five clinically important outcomes: cognition, global performance, safety, activities of daily living and behaviour and summarised the effects using mean differences for continuous outcomes and risk ratios or risk differences for binary outcomes. We stratified the studies into those that estimated the TCHM versus 'no treatment' effect and those that estimated the TCHM versus the WM effect, with further stratification by the specific TCHM tested or by one of the four modes of action. We pooled using a random-effects model. Due to substantial clinical and design heterogeneity, we did not estimate an 'overall TCHM effect'.

MAIN RESULTS

We only found studies (47 studies, 3581 participants) for 18 of the 29 eligible TCHMs as defined by our inclusion criteria. All were superiority trials conducted in China between 1997 and 2013, with most employing a two-arm parallel design with sample sizes ranging from 26 to 240 and a median treatment duration of 12 weeks (range: 2 to 24 weeks).We found that reporting and trial methodology were generally poor; in particular, there was a lack of information on randomisation, an absence of blinding of participants and outcome assessors and incomplete reporting of adverse events (AEs). None of the 30 trials published from 2007 onwards adopted the CONSORT recommendations for reporting RCTs of herbal interventions.We found seven TCHMs which each had potentially large benefits in studies estimating the TCHM versus 'no treatment' effect and in studies estimating the TCHM versus the WM effect. Two TCHMs (NaoXinTong and TongXinLuo) were common to both groups. Three of these TCHMs - Nao XinTong, NaoMaiTai and TongXinLuo - had the strongest evidence to justify further research. Two TCHMs (NaoMaiTai and TongXinLuo) had a 5% or more increased risk of AEs compared to the 'no Treatment' control, but the quality of this evidence was poor.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found moderate- to very low-quality evidence of benefit and harm of TCHMs for VaD. Methodological inadequacies need to be addressed by better conducted and reported trials. We identified NaoMaiTai, NaoXinTong and TongXinLuo as warranting special research priority.

Quality of randomized controlled trials of new generation antidepressants and antipsychotics identified in the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI): a literature and telephone interview study

Background

We are witnessing an exponential increase in the number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reported from mainland China. The increase is particularly notable in the field of new generation antidepressants and antipsychotics. Several previous studies have raised doubts regarding their quality. However, the quality of most recent RCTs published in China may have improved.

Methods

We searched RCTs that examined new generation antidepressants and antipsychotics published between 2013 and 2016 in the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), the largest database of scientific publications in China. We interviewed the authors of a random subset of the identified references. We assessed the methodological rigor of each study based on the published reports and telephone interviews with the authors using six methodological domains adapted from the Cochrane’s risk of bias tool.

Results

The final sample consisted of 138 studies, for which we interviewed 58 authors; the authors of 51 studies declined the interview, and the authors of 29 studies could not be contacted. The 51 studies with refused interviews were significantly less likely to be reported from university-affiliated hospitals and were less likely to be published in Chinese core journals. Based on the published reports, most of the 58 studies were assessed to be at unclear risk of bias in most methodological domains. After the interview, only 10 studies were assessed to be at low risk of bias for sequence generation and allocation concealment. Assuming that the studies for which the authors declined interviews had an unclear risk, the proportion of RCTs at low risk of bias in both sequence generation and allocation concealment was 9.2% (10/109, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.0 to 16.2). The interviews indicated that the studies were at high risk of bias for most of the other domains.

Conclusion

In general, RCTs that evaluate new generation antidepressants or antipsychotics and are indexed in the CNKI continue to be of low quality. When conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses in this field, it would be wise to include a specialist from China as a coresearcher to help assess the risk of bias in the identified studies.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12874-018-0554-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Implementing a larviciding efficacy or effectiveness control intervention against malaria vectors: key parameters for success

During the last decade, scale-up of vector control tools such as long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS) contributed to the reduction of malaria morbidity and mortality across the continent. Because these first line interventions are now affected by many challenges such as insecticide resistance, change in vector feeding and biting behaviour, outdoor malaria transmission and adaptation of mosquito to polluted environments, the World Health Organization recommends the use of integrated control approaches to improve, control and elimination of malaria. Larviciding is one of these approaches which, if well implemented, could help control malaria in areas where this intervention is suitable. Unfortunately, important knowledge gaps remain in its successful application. The present review summarises key parameters that should be considered when implementing larviciding efficacy or effectiveness trials.

Comparative evidence on harms in pediatric randomized clinical trials from less developed versus more developed countries is limited

OBJECTIVES

Evaluate comparative harm rates from medical interventions in pediatric randomized clinical trials (RCTs) from more developed (MDCs) and less developed countries (LDCs).

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Meta-epidemiologic empirical evaluation of Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (June 2014) meta-analyses reporting clinically important harm-outcomes (severe adverse events [AEs], discontinuations due to AEs, any AE, and mortality) that included at least one pediatric RCT from MDCs and at least one from LDCs. We estimated relative odds ratios (RORs) for each harm, within each meta-analysis, between RCTs from MDCs and LDCs and calculated random-effects-summary-RORs (sRORs) for each harm across multiple meta-analyses.

RESULTS

Only 1% (26/2,363) of meta-analyses with clinically important harm-outcomes in the entire Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews included pediatric RCTs both from MDCs and LDCs. We analyzed 26 meta-analyses with 244 data sets from pediatric RCTs, 116 from MDCs and 128 from LDCs (64 and 66 unique RCTs respectively). The summary ROR was 0.92 (95% confidence intervals: 0.78-1.08) for severe AEs; 1.13 (0.54-2.34) for discontinuations due to AEs; 1.10 (0.77-1.59) for any AE; and 0.99 (0.61-1.61) for mortality and for the all-harms-combined-end point 0.96 (0.83-1.10). Differences of ROR-point-estimates ≥2-fold between MDCs and LDCs were identified in 35% of meta-analyses.

CONCLUSION

We found no major systematic differences in harm rates in pediatric trials between MDCs and LDCs, but data on harms in children were overall very limited.

The quality of reports of medical and public health research from Palestinian institutions: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Over the past decade, there has been an increase in reports of health research from Palestine, but no assessment of their quality. We have assessed the quality of reports of Palestinian health research and factors associated with it.

DESIGN

This is a systematic review.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

We searched Medline and Scopus for reports of original research relevant to human health or healthcare authored by researchers affiliated with Palestinian institutions and published between January 2000 and August 2015 inclusive.

OUTCOMES

We used international guidelines to assess report quality, classifying as adequate those with ≥50% of items completely addressed.

RESULTS

Of 2383 reports identified, 497 met our inclusion criteria. Just over half (264; 55%) of these were published after 2010. 354 (71%) of first authors were affiliated with Palestinian institutions; 261 (53%) reports had coauthors from outside Palestine. The majority of the reports in our study were inadequately reported (342; 69%), and none had adequately reported all items. Of 439 observational studies, 11 (2.5%) reports provided adequate descriptions of eligibility criteria and selection procedures; 35 (8%) reported efforts to address potential sources of bias; 50 (11.4%) reported the basis for the study sample size; and funding sources were mentioned in 74 reports (17%). Higher reporting quality was associated with international affiliation of the first author (prevalence ratio (PR) 1.6 (95% CI 1.2 to 2.1)), international collaboration (PR 2.9 (95% CI 1.7 to 5.0)), international funding (PR 1.9 (95% CI1.5 to 2.5)), publication after 2005 (PR 3.9 (95% CI 1.8 to 8.5)) and four or more coauthors (PR 1.5 (95% CI 1.1 to 2.1)).

CONCLUSION

Although the quality of reports of Palestinian research has improved in recent years, it remains well below an acceptable standard. International reporting guidelines should be used to guide research design and improve the quality of reports of research.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

The systematic review protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) registery (registration number: CRD42015027553).

Comparative rates of harms in randomized trials from more developed versus less developed countries may be different

OBJECTIVES

We set up to evaluate the relative risk of harms in trials performed in less developed vs. more developed countries.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Meta-epidemiologic evaluation using the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. We considered meta-analyses with at least one randomized clinical trial (RCT) in a less developed country and one RCT in a more developed country. We targeted severe adverse events (AEs), discontinuations due to AEs, any AE, organ system-specific AEs, individual AEs, and all discontinuations due to any reason. We estimated the relative odds ratio (ROR) of harms between more and less developed countries for each topic and the summary ROR (sROR) across topics under each category of harms.

RESULTS

We identified 42 systematic reviews (128 meta-analyses, 521 independent RCTs). Summary sRORs did not differ significantly from 1.00 for any harm category. Nominally significant RORs were found in only 6/128 meta-analyses. However, in 27% (35/128) of meta-analyses the ROR point estimates indicated relative differences between country settings >2-fold. Considering also ROR 95% confidence intervals, in 92% (118/128) of meta-analyses one could not exclude a 2-fold difference in both directions.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified limited comparative evidence on harms in trials from these two country settings. Substantial differences in the risk point estimates were common; the potential for modest differences could rarely be excluded with confidence.

Effect of regulation reform on clinical trials for registering novel therapeutic agents in Taiwan: a chronological analysis

The registration process for new drugs is crucial in the clinical application of medicines. Previously, the registration of imported novel therapeutic agents in Taiwan depended considerably on their approvals in developed countries. The Taiwanese government enacted Article 38-1 of the Regulations for Registration of Medicinal Products in September 2009. According to the new submission criteria, approvals may be exempted if the number of Taiwanese participants in the clinical trials fulfills the required threshold. The present study compared the profiles of clinical trials of novel therapeutic agents before and after the enactment of this regulation in terms of over-threshold trials, structural types, and therapeutic areas across phases. The outcome-whether the liberalization of the submission criteria functioned as an incentive to launch clinical trials in Taiwan-was also evaluated. The results revealed that the number of clinical trial applications increased after the reformed regulation was enacted, even after the over-threshold criteria were considered; however, the increase disappeared for phase III trials. Most clinical trials were for chemical products and antineoplastic agents across all phases and study periods before and after the enactment of Article 38-1. Furthermore, the increase in the number of international clinical trials conducted in Taiwan was not directly caused by the regulation reform because the percentage of investigational products fulfilling the exemption criteria did not increase. These paradoxical results were interpreted in several aspects, referring particularly to the well-established infrastructure for launching clinical trials as well as the integral environment of medical services in Taiwan.

The quality of evidence in Chinese meta-analyses needs to be improved

OBJECTIVES

We conducted a systematic review using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system to assess the quality of evidence of Chinese meta-analyses (MAs).

DESIGN/SETTING

A systematic review of MAs listed in Chinese Biomedicine Literature Database from January 2010 to December 2012.

METHODS

Mesh term "meta-analysis" was used to search the Chinese Biomedicine Literature Database from January 2010 to December 2012. Characteristics and main outcomes of each included MA were extracted, and the GRADE system was used to assess the quality of evidence for each outcome. A 10% random sample of Cochrane MAs between 2010 and 2012 was also assessed as control group.

RESULTS

A total of 564 Chinese MAs (including 1,237 main outcomes) and 95 Cochrane MAs (including 251 main outcomes) were identified. Almost half (600, 48.5%) of the outcomes in Chinese MAs were rated as low, and the proportion of outcomes with high or moderate quality of evidence was lower in Chinese MAs than Cochrane MAs (Chinese, 406 [32.8%] vs. Cochrane MAs, 155 [61.8%], P < 0.001). Of the outcomes in Chinese MAs, 1,012 (81.8%) were downgraded for risk of bias. Other common factors for downgrading were imprecision (448, 36.2%), publication bias (418, 33.8%), inconsistency (351, 28.4%), and indirectness (1, 0.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Chinese MAs were of low quality of evidence. Risk of bias, inconsistency, and publication bias were the three most common downgrade factors in Chinese MAs. Efforts must be made to improve quality of evidence of Chinese MAs, and a call for more rigorous training of investigators in China is warranted.

The shortcomings of clinical practice guidelines

Accumulation of medical knowledge related to diagnosis and management over the last 5-6 decades has altered the course of diseases, improved clinical outcomes and increased survival. Thus, it has become difficult for the practicing physician to evaluate the long-term effects of a particular therapy on survival of an individual patient. Further, the approach by each physician to an individual patient with the same disease is not always uniform. In an attempt to assist physicians in applying newly acquired knowledge to patients, clinical practice guidelines were introduced by various scientific societies. Guidelines assist in facilitating the translation of new research discoveries into clinical practice; however, despite the improvements over the years, there are still several issues related to guidelines that often appear ‘lost in translation'. Guidelines are based on the results of randomized clinical trials, other nonrandomized studies, and expert opinion (i.e. the opinion of most members of the guideline committees). The merits and limitations of randomized clinical trials, guideline committees, and presentation of guidelines will be discussed. In addition, proposals to improve guidelines will be presented.

Prone position for acute respiratory failure in adults

BACKGROUND

Acute hypoxaemia de novo or on a background of chronic hypoxaemia is a common reason for admission to intensive care and for provision of mechanical ventilation. Various refinements of mechanical ventilation or adjuncts are employed to improve patient outcomes. Mortality from acute respiratory distress syndrome, one of the main contributors to the need for mechanical ventilation for hypoxaemia, remains approximately 40%. Ventilation in the prone position may improve lung mechanics and gas exchange and could improve outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this review are (1) to ascertain whether prone ventilation offers a mortality advantage when compared with traditional supine or semi recumbent ventilation in patients with severe acute respiratory failure requiring conventional invasive artificial ventilation, and (2) to supplement previous systematic reviews on prone ventilation for hypoxaemic respiratory failure in an adult population.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2014, Issue 1), Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to 31 January 2014), EMBASE (1980 to 31 January 2014), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (1982 to 31 January 2014) and Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) (1992 to 31 January 2014) in Ovid MEDLINE for eligible randomized controlled trials. We also searched for studies by handsearching reference lists of relevant articles, by contacting colleagues and by handsearching published proceedings of relevant journals. We applied no language constraints, and we reran the searches in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and LILACS in June 2015. We added five new studies of potential interest to the list of "Studies awaiting classification" and will incorporate them into formal review findings during the review update.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined the effects of prone position versus supine/semi recumbent position during conventional mechanical ventilation in adult participants with acute hypoxaemia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed all trials identified by the search and assessed them for suitability, methods and quality. Two review authors extracted data, and three review authors reviewed the data extracted. We analysed data using Review Manager software and pooled included studies to determine the risk ratio (RR) for mortality and the risk ratio or mean difference (MD) for secondary outcomes; we also performed subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified nine relevant RCTs, which enrolled a total of 2165 participants (10 publications). All recruited participants suffered from disorders of lung function causing moderate to severe hypoxaemia and requiring mechanical ventilation, so they were fairly comparable, given the heterogeneity of specific disease diagnoses in intensive care. Risk of bias, although acceptable in the view of the review authors, was inevitable: Blinding of participants and carers to treatment allocation was not possible (face-up vs face-down).Primary analyses of short- and longer-term mortality pooled from six trials demonstrated an RR of 0.84 to 0.86 in favour of the prone position (PP), but findings were not statistically significant: In the short term, mortality for those ventilated prone was 33.4% (363/1086) and supine 38.3% (395/1031). This resulted in an RR of 0.84 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 to 1.02) marginally in favour of PP. For longer-term mortality, results showed 41.7% (462/1107) for prone and 47.1% (490/1041) for supine positions, with an RR of 0.86 (95% CI 0.72 to 1.03). The quality of the evidence for both outcomes was rated as low as a result of important potential bias and serious inconsistency.Subgroup analyses for mortality identified three groups consistently favouring PP: those recruited within 48 hours of meeting entry criteria (five trials; 1024 participants showed an RR of 0.75 (95% CI 0.59 to 94)); those treated in the PP for 16 or more hours per day (five trials; 1005 participants showed an RR of 0.77 (95% CI 0.61 to 0.99)); and participants with more severe hypoxaemia at trial entry (six trials; 1108 participants showed an RR of 0.77 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.92)). The quality of the evidence for these outcomes was rated as moderate as a result of potentially important bias.Prone positioning appeared to influence adverse effects: Pressure sores (three trials; 366 participants) with an RR of 1.37 (95% CI 1.05 to 1.79) and tracheal tube obstruction with an RR of 1.78 (95% CI 1.22 to 2.60) were increased with prone ventilation. Reporting of arrhythmias was reduced with PP, with an RR of 0.64 (95% CI 0.47 to 0.87).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no convincing evidence of benefit nor harm from universal application of PP in adults with hypoxaemia mechanically ventilated in intensive care units (ICUs). Three subgroups (early implementation of PP, prolonged adoption of PP and severe hypoxaemia at study entry) suggested that prone positioning may confer a statistically significant mortality advantage. Additional adequately powered studies would be required to confirm or refute these possibilities of subgroup benefit but are unlikely, given results of the most recent study and recommendations derived from several published subgroup analyses. Meta-analysis of individual patient data could be useful for further data exploration in this regard. Complications such as tracheal obstruction are increased with use of prone ventilation. Long-term mortality data (12 months and beyond), as well as functional, neuro-psychological and quality of life data, are required if future studies are to better inform the role of PP in the management of hypoxaemic respiratory failure in the ICU.

Globalization in Urology: A Bibliographical Analysis of Cross-Continent Publication between 2002 and 2012

INTRODUCTION

Asian scientists have now increasingly begun to contribute to globalization; yet it is not clear whether publishing in the field of urology is paralleled by elevated cross-continental scientific publishing.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An exemplary bibliometric analysis of urologic journals from 3 different continents was conducted between 2002 and 2012. Based on the ISI Web of Knowledge Journal Citation Reports, 2 urologic journals with similar impact factors (IFs) in 2013 were selected from Europe ('British Journal of Urology International', 'World Journal of Urology'), Asia ('International Journal of Urology', 'Asian Journal of Andrology') and North America ('Urologic Oncology-Seminars and Original Investigations', 'Urology'). The home continent of the journal, the workplace continental affiliation of the last author, article type (clinical, experimental or review) as well as the IF were documented.

RESULTS

Most authors published their manuscripts in journals from the same continent in which they worked. However, a significant increase in cross-continental publishing was apparent from 2002 to 2012. Asians publishing in North America increased from 17% in 2002 to 35% in 2012. Europeans also increased the number of articles they published in North American journals, while publications from North American authors were shifted towards both European and Asian journals. Experimental and clinical articles showed significant increases in cross-continental publishing, while review publishing showed no significant change. The average IF for authors from all 3 continents increased from 2002 to 2012 (p < 0.001). The largest increase in the IF was found for Asian authors (0.11 per year).

CONCLUSIONS

Cross-continental publication significantly increased during the period from 2002 to 2012. The impact that the Asian authors have experienced was found to be gradually impacting the North American and European colleagues.

CONSORT in China: past development and future direction

The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement was published in 1996, and first introduced to China in 2001. Although CONSORT has been widely accepted in high-quality international journals, we still need to have more investigation on how many Chinese journals have adopted the CONSORT Statement, and whether the quality of reporting has improved. A systematic search of the “Instructions to authors” in all Chinese medical journals in China Academic Journals (CAJ) Full-text Database was conducted up to February 2012 and only 7 journals officially listed the requirements of the CONSORT Statement. The research articles about randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in 2002, 2004, 2006, 2008, and 2010 from journals which had specifically adopted the CONSORT Statement, and from 30 top journals based on the Chinese Science Citation Index (CSCI) 2011 as the control group, were identified. The quality of both cohorts of articles was assessed using the revised CONSORT Checklist and Jadad scale. A total of 1221 Chinese medical journals was identified. Only seven journals stated clearly in the “Instructions to authors” that authors should adopt the CONSORT requirement in the clinical trial paper. None of these journals is among the control group in the CSCI 2011. In the selected years, a total of 171 articles from 7 journals which had adopted CONSORT and 232 articles in the control were identified as including RCT trials. The average scores according to the revised CONSORT Checklist were 29.47 for the CONSORT-adopting journals and 25.57 for the control group; while the average scores based on the Jadad scale were 2.53 for CONSORT-adopting journals and 1.97 for the control group. Few journals among Chinese medical journals have adopted the CONSORT Statement. The overall quality of RCT reports in the 7 journals which have adopted CONSORT was better than those in the top 30 journals which have not adopteded CONSORT. The quality of RCT reports in Chinese journals needs further improvement, and the CONSORT Statement could be a very helpful guideline.

A multistudy analysis investigating systematic differences in cardiovascular trial results between Europe and Asia

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether there are differences in the results of cardiovascular trials between Europe and Asia using data from an extensive collection of randomised controlled trials.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

All meta-analyses containing randomised controlled trials (RCT's) for the treatment or prevention of cardiovascular diseases were searched for in The Cochrane Library (2000-2008) and MEDLINE (2005-2008). Analysis was then conducted within and over each meta-analysis which satisfied given criteria. Separate estimates of treatment effect were calculated for Europe and Asia in each meta-analysis and then compared. Estimates of a common inter-continental difference over all meta-analyses were also calculated and meta-regression was performed. This was performed for both fatal and non-fatal end points.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 59 meta-analyses that satisfied the inclusion criteria. After exclusion, the number of meta-analyses reporting greater effect sizes in Asia than in Europe was significantly more than would be expected by chance (fatal 12/14, p=0.013; non-fatal 23/32, p=0.020).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides some evidence that for cardiovascular interventions treatment effect estimation differs between Europe and Asia, with respect to both fatal and non-fatal end points.

A systematic review of Chinese randomized clinical trials of SSRI treatment of depression

BACKGROUND

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) have become the most frequently used antidepressants in China in recent decades. This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the efficacy and tolerability of SSRIs in Chinese studies and the quality of Chinese randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

Major Western and Chinese electronic databases were searched for double-blind, parallel group randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SSRIs (fluoxetine, citalopram, escitalopram, fluvoxamine, paroxetine, or sertraline) with other antidepressants such as SSRI, Selective Noradrenaline Reuptake Inhibitor (SNRI), tricyclic antidepressant (TCA), Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) and/or placebo. Response, remission, and dropout rates due to side effects were defined as primary outcomes. Mean total Hamilton Rating Scale of Depression (HAMD) scores at endpoint, overall dropout rates and total Treatment Emergent Symptom Scale (TESS) scores were defined as secondary outcomes. Data were combined with random effects models. Risk of bias was assessed by the Cochrane evaluation tool. Quality of reports was assessed by the fulfilment of Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trial (CONSORT) items.

RESULTS

A total of 71 studies were included. Only one study was listed in both Chinese and Western databases. SSRIs were found to be more effective than TCAs. No significant differences were observed regarding dropout rates due to side effects. Using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, adequate methods of sequence generation were described in 16 (23%) studies. All authors failed to report trial registration. Informed consent, sources of funding, email address, protocol, and limitations were also not mentioned in most studies. However, reporting quality improved steadily between 1996 and 2013.

CONCLUSIONS

In light of the low trial quality, the findings of a significant advantage of SSRI over TCA in terms of response rate and remission rate should be replicated by large high-quality Chinese studies.

Relation of completeness of reporting of health research to journals' endorsement of reporting guidelines: systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether the completeness of reporting of health research is related to journals' endorsement of reporting guidelines.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

Reporting guidelines from a published systematic review and the EQUATOR Network (October 2011). Studies assessing the completeness of reporting by using an included reporting guideline (termed "evaluations") (1990 to October 2011; addendum searches in January 2012) from searches of either Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Methodology Register or Scopus, depending on reporting guideline name.

STUDY SELECTION

English language reporting guidelines that provided explicit guidance for reporting, described the guidance development process, and indicated use of a consensus development process were included. The CONSORT statement was excluded, as evaluations of adherence to CONSORT had previously been reviewed. English or French language evaluations of included reporting guidelines were eligible if they assessed the completeness of reporting of studies as a primary intent and those included studies enabled the comparisons of interest (that is, after versus before journal endorsement and/or endorsing versus non-endorsing journals).

DATA EXTRACTION

Potentially eligible evaluations of included guidelines were screened initially by title and abstract and then as full text reports. If eligibility was unclear, authors of evaluations were contacted; journals' websites were consulted for endorsement information where needed. The completeness of reporting of reporting guidelines was analyzed in relation to endorsement by item and, where consistent with the authors' analysis, a mean summed score.

RESULTS

101 reporting guidelines were included. Of 15,249 records retrieved from the search for evaluations, 26 evaluations that assessed completeness of reporting in relation to endorsement for nine reporting guidelines were identified. Of those, 13 evaluations assessing seven reporting guidelines (BMJ economic checklist, CONSORT for harms, PRISMA, QUOROM, STARD, STRICTA, and STROBE) could be analyzed. Reporting guideline items were assessed by few evaluations.

CONCLUSIONS

The completeness of reporting of only nine of 101 health research reporting guidelines (excluding CONSORT) has been evaluated in relation to journals' endorsement. Items from seven reporting guidelines were quantitatively analyzed, by few evaluations each. Insufficient evidence exists to determine the relation between journals' endorsement of reporting guidelines and the completeness of reporting of published health research reports. Journal editors and researchers should consider collaborative prospectively designed, controlled studies to provide more robust evidence.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

Not registered; no known register currently accepts protocols for methodology systematic reviews.

Doing the Right Thing or Doing the Thing Right

This article discusses implications of participant withdrawal for inductive research. I describe and analyze how a third of my participants withdrew from a grounded theory study. I position my example, ensuing issues, and potential solutions as reflective of inductive methodologies as a whole. The crux of the problem is the disruption inflicted by withdrawal on inductive processes of generating knowledge. I examine the subsequent methodological and ethical issues in trying to determine the best course of action following withdrawal. I suggest three potential options for researchers: Continuing the study with partial data, continuing the study with all data, and discontinuing the study. Motivated by my experience, and wider theoretical considerations, I present several suggestions and questions, with the aim of supporting researchers in determining the best course of action for their individual field circumstances.

The need for multicentre cardiovascular clinical trials in Asia

Historically, the USA and European countries have been the dominant figures in medical research. However, in the past 10 years, Asia has emerged as a new 'hot spot' for clinical research owing to the tremendous potential generated by steady economic growth, remarkable advances in research and development capacity, and an expanding population. However, investigators involved with the set-up and conduct of multicentre trials in such a vast and heterogeneous continent face huge challenges-bridging the fundamental differences between the Asian countries, such as languages, resources, regulatory procedural timelines, and the general understanding of clinical research. In this Perspectives article, we explain why Asia should be established as a hub for large multicentre trials, discuss the challenges involved, and highlight the importance of a strong collaborative infrastructure for multiple investigational sites in this culturally diverse continent.

Visualization of evidence-based medicine domain knowledge: production and citation of Cochrane systematic reviews

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the production and utilization of Cochrane systematic reviews (CSRs) and to analyze its influential factors, so as to improve the capacity of translating CSRs into practice.

METHODS

All CSRs and protocols were retrieved from the Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2011) and citation data were retrieved from SCI database. Citation analysis was used to analyze the situation of CSRs production and utilization.

RESULTS

CSR publication had grown from an annual average of 32 to 718 documents. Only one developing country was among the ten countries with the largest amount of publications. High-income countries accounted for 83% of CSR publications and 90.8% of cited counts. A total 34.7% of CSRs had a cited count of 0, whereas only 0.9% had been cited more than 50 times. Highly cited CSRs were published in England, Australia, Canada, USA and other high-income countries. The countries with a Cochrane center or a Cochrane methodology group had a greater capability of CSRs production and citing than others. The CSRs addressing the topics of diseases were more than those targeted at public health issues. There was a big gap in citations of different interventions even on the same topic.

CONCLUSIONS

The capability of CSR production and utilization grew rapidly, but varied among countries and institutions, which was affected by several factors such as the capability of research, resources and the applicability of evidence. It is important to improve evidence translation through educating, training and prioritizing the problems based on real demands of end users.

Content and quality of 10,000 controlled trials in schizophrenia over 60 years

OBJECTIVE

To carry out an up-to-date comprehensive survey of the content and quality of intervention trials relevant to the treatment of people with schizophrenia.

DESIGN

Data were extracted and analyzed from 10,000 trials on the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Source, type and date of publication, country of origin, language, size of trial, interventions, and outcome measures.

RESULTS

In the last decade, there has been a great increase in the number of trials relevant to schizophrenia and an improvement in the accessibility to reports. The number of trials per year is rising (currently ∼600/year) with China now producing 25% of the annual total. The number of reports of trials is increasing at an even greater rate due to multiple publications. Drug trials still dominate (83%) although an increasing proportion of studies are now evaluating psychological therapies (21%). Trials remain small (median 60 people) and often employ new nonvalidated outcomes scales (2194 different scales were employed with every fifth trial introducing a new rating instrument).

CONCLUSIONS

A more collaborative, pragmatic, and patient-centered approach is necessary to produce larger schizophrenia trials. Wider consultation and careful consideration of all relevant perspectives would result in trials with greater clinical utility and direct value to people with the illness and their families or carers.

Forty-five years of schizophrenia trials in Italy: a survey

Background

Well-designed and properly executed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) provide the best evidence on the efficacy of healthcare interventions. Mental health has a strong tradition of using trial to evaluate treatments, but the translation of research to clinical practice is not always easy. Even well-conducted trials do not necessarily address the needs of every day care and trials can reflect local needs and the specific culture in which they are undertaken. Generalizing results to other contexts can become problematic but these trials may, nevertheless, be very helpful within their own context. Moreover, pathways for drug approval can be different depending on local regulatory agencies. Local trials are helpful for decision-making in the region from which they come, but should not be viewed in isolation. National quantity and quality of trials may vary across nations.

The aim of this study is to quantify trialing activity in Italy from 1948 until 2009 and to describe characteristics of these trials. In addition, we evaluated change over time in three keys aspects: sample size, follow-up duration, and number of outcomes.

Methods

We used the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's register that contains 16,000 citations to 13,000 studies relating only to people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like illness. Randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials undertaken in Italy and involving pharmacological interventions were included.

Results

The original search identified 155 records of potentially eligible studies, 74 of which were excluded because do not meet inclusion criteria. A total of 81 studies were included in the analysis. The majority of trials were conducted in north Italy, and published in international journals between 1981 and 1995. The majority of studies (52 out of 81) used standardized diagnostic criteria for schizophrenia disorder. They were defined as randomized and used blind methods to administer treatment. However, most failed to report detail regarding methodological procedures and it is difficult to ascertain which studies are associated with a low risk of bias.

Conclusions

Trials should be designed to address the needs of everyday care with the aim of following large samples of typical patients in the long term. The Italian tradition in the area of trialing treatments for people with schizophrenia is not as strong as in many other similar countries and Italy should be producing more, better, independent, and clinically relevant trials.

Assessment of methodological quality and outcome measures of acute stroke randomized controlled trials in China in recent 15 years

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the most important evidence to guide clinical practice in the treatment of acute stroke. This study aims to evaluate the changes of quantity and methodological quality of acute stroke RCTs in Mainland China published in recent 15 years.

METHOD

We included un-confounded RCTs on acute stroke from eight databases published in Chinese or English from 1996 to 2010. General characteristics, design methodology, and outcome measures of studies were assessed.

RESULTS

Totally, 9061 RCTs were identified. The number of acute stroke RCTs had increased by years, the total of trials published in 2010 was 20 times of that published in 1996. Three thousand four hundred eighty-eight trials (38.5%) used western drugs in the treatment, 3026 (33.4%) trials used traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), and 1933 (22.0%) trials used physical therapy. Ischemic stroke was the most common research subject among all trials (65.1%, 5,989). There were 541 (6.0%) RCTs using adequate randomization methods, 34 (0.4%) RCTs using adequate allocation concealment, and 195 (2.2%) using adequate blinding methods. Thirty-three (0.4%) RCTs adopted both adequate randomization methods and allocation concealment. Only 23 (0.3%) trials used all three methods of adequate randomization methods, allocation concealment, and blinding. During the 15 years, only the number of trials using adequate randomized methods and reporting adverse events had significantly increased (both P < 0.001). As for these RCTs, only the number of trials using adequate blinding method in pharmaceutical intervention was statistical differences compared with that of nondrug intervention trials (P = 0.043). Outcomes were assessed blindly in 72 trials. Death was reported by 14.2% of trials, impairment by 85.1%, disability by 22.5%, and handicap or quality of life by 0.4%. 99.7% trials reported positive results. Larger trials were more likely to use adequate randomized methods, allocation concealment and blinding methods, as well as to measure disability. Only 14 large-sample high-quality RCTs were found.

CONCLUSION

During 15 years, the number of acute stroke RCTs has increased dramatically, but the quality of trials improves slowly. Most acute stroke trials used inadequate outcome measures in terms of their content, reliability, validity, blinding assessment.

Schizophrenia trials conducted in African countries: a drop of evidence in the ocean of morbidity?

Objective

To quantify schizophrenia trialling activity in African countries and to describe the main features of these trials.

Methods

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Register, which contains 16,000 citations to 13,000 studies relating only to people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like illness, to identify schizophrenia trials conducted in Africa without time limitation.

Results

A total of 38 trials met the inclusion criteria and were included in our analysis. Of the 54 countries of Africa, only 8 produced at least one trial: South Africa produced the majority of trials (20 out of 38 trials, 53%), followed by Nigeria (7 out of 38 trials, 18%) and Egypt (4 out of 38 trials, 11%). The majority of studies investigated the efficacy of pharmacological interventions, were short in duration, and employed a double-blind design. The quality of reporting was generally poor. We found six trials comparing antipsychotics from the WHO Essential List of Medicine versus new generation antipsychotics. In terms of efficacy and acceptability, these studies failed to show any advantage of newer antipsychotics over first-generation agents.

Conclusions

We observed an impressive mismatch between the number of individuals with schizophrenia living in African countries, estimated to be around 10 million, and the overall number of patients included in African trials, which is less than 2,000. These few trials were of low quality and appeared not to reflect the real needs of the population. We argue that the concept of pragmatism should be introduced into the design of randomized trials in African countries. Pragmatic trials should investigate whether treatments, given in real-world circumstances, really have clinically meaningful effects.

Assessment of adherence to the CONSORT statement for quality of reports on randomized controlled trial abstracts from four high-impact general medical journals

BACKGROUND

The extended Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement for Abstracts was developed to improve the quality of reports of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) because readers often base their assessment of a trial solely on the abstract. To date, few data exist regarding whether it has achieved this goal. We evaluated the extent of adherence to the CONSORT for Abstract statement for quality of reports on RCT abstracts by four high-impact general medical journals.

METHODS

A descriptive analysis of published RCT abstracts in The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), The Lancet, The Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA), and the British Medical Journal (BMJ) in the year 2010 was conducted by two reviewers, independently extracting data from a MEDLINE/PubMed search.

RESULTS

We identified 271 potential RCT abstracts meeting our inclusion criteria. More than half of the abstracts identified the study as randomized in the title (58.7%; 159/271), reported the specific objective/hypothesis (72.7%; 197/271), described participant eligibility criteria with settings for data collection (60.9%; 165/271), detailed the interventions for both groups (90.8%; 246/271), and clearly defined the primary outcome (94.8%; 257/271). However, the methodological quality domains were inadequately reported: allocation concealment (11.8%; 32/271) and details of blinding (21.0%; 57/271). Reporting the primary outcome results for each group was done in 84.1% (228/271). Almost all of the abstracts reported trial registration (99.3%; 269/271), whereas reports of funding and of harm or side effects from the interventions were found in only 47.6% (129/271) and 42.8% (116/271) of the abstracts, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings show inconsistencies and non-adherence to the CONSORT for abstract guidelines, especially in the methodological quality domains. Improvements in the quality of RCT reports can be expected by adhering to existing standards and guidelines as expressed by the CONSORT group.

Randomized trials published in Chinese or Western journals: comparative empirical analysis

A major concern to the inclusion in systematic reviews of studies originating in China and published in Chinese journals refers to the quality of study reporting. In this systematic survey of randomized trials, we compared the characteristics of studies published in Chinese journals with those of studies published in Western journals. We included 69 studies comparing citalopram with other antidepressant drugs in the treatment of major depression. Of these, 37 (54%) were published in Chinese journals. The standard of reporting was generally poor in both Western and Chinese studies. In some Chinese studies, the generation of the randomization sequence raised concern about their experimental nature, and in almost all included studies, the concealment of allocation was not properly described. Blinding was seldom adopted in Chinese studies, and the risk of sponsorship bias was uncertain because Chinese studies did not report any financial support. In most Western studies, outcome data were selectively and incompletely reported. Pooling together all trials revealed that citalopram was similarly effective in comparison with all other antidepressant drugs both in Western studies (standardized mean difference, -0.04; 95% confidence interval, -0.15 to 0.06) and in Chinese studies (standardized mean difference, -0.08, 95% confidence interval, -0.18 to 0.02). Randomized controlled trials published in Chinese journals represent most of the studies included in this review. This suggests that omitting to search biomedical databases originating from China would systematically exclude a relevant proportion of randomized trials published in Chinese journals, with a risk of random error or bias. The increasing inclusion of Chinese studies in systematic reviews reinforces the need to check the quality of randomized trials that are meta-analyzed.

Does journal endorsement of reporting guidelines influence the completeness of reporting of health research? A systematic review protocol

BACKGROUND

Reporting of health research is often inadequate and incomplete. Complete and transparent reporting is imperative to enable readers to assess the validity of research findings for use in healthcare and policy decision-making. To this end, many guidelines, aimed at improving the quality of health research reports, have been developed for reporting a variety of research types. Despite efforts, many reporting guidelines are underused. In order to increase their uptake, evidence of their effectiveness is important and will provide authors, peer reviewers and editors with an important resource for use and implementation of pertinent guidance. The objective of this study was to assess whether endorsement of reporting guidelines by journals influences the completeness of reporting of health studies.

METHODS

Guidelines providing a minimum set of items to guide authors in reporting a specific type of research, developed with explicit methodology, and using a consensus process will be identified from an earlier systematic review and from the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network's reporting guidelines library. MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Methodology Register and Scopus will be searched for evaluations of those reporting guidelines; relevant evaluations from the recently conducted CONSORT systematic review will also be included. Single data extraction with 10% verification of study characteristics, 20% of outcomes and complete verification of aspects of study validity will be carried out. We will include evaluations of reporting guidelines that assess the completeness of reporting: (1) before and after journal endorsement, and/or (2) between endorsing and non-endorsing journals. For a given guideline, analyses will be conducted for individual and the total sum of items. When possible, standard, pooled effects with 99% confidence intervals using random effects models will be calculated.

DISCUSSION

Evidence on which guidelines have been evaluated and which are associated with improved completeness of reporting is important for various stakeholders, including editors who consider which guidelines to endorse in their journal editorial policies.

Endorsement of the CONSORT statement by high-impact medical journals in China: a survey of instructions for authors and published papers

BACKGROUND

The CONSORT Statement is a reporting guideline for authors when reporting randomized controlled trials (RCTs). It offers a standard way for authors to prepare RCT reports. It has been endorsed by many high-impact medical journals and by international editorial groups. This study was conducted to assess the endorsement of the CONSORT Statement by high-impact medical journals in China by reviewing their instructions for authors.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

A total of 200 medical journals were selected according to the Chinese Science and Technology Journal Citation Reports, 195 of which publish clinical research papers. Their instructions for authors were reviewed and all texts mentioning the CONSORT Statement or CONSORT extension papers were extracted. Any mention of the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals (URM) developed by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) or 'clinical trial registration' was also extracted. For journals endorsing the CONSORT Statement, their most recently published RCT reports were retrieved and evaluated to assess whether the journals have followed what the CONSORT Statement required. Out of the 195 medical journals publishing clinical research papers, only six (6/195, 3.08%) mentioned 'CONSORT' in their instructions for authors; out of the 200 medical journals surveyed, only 14 (14/200, 7.00%) mentioned 'ICMJE' or 'URM' in their instructions for authors, and another five journals stated in their instructions for authors that clinical trials should have trial registration numbers and that priority would be given to clinical trials which had been registered. Among the 62 RCT reports published in the six journals endorsing the CONSORT Statement, 20 (20/62, 32.26%) contained flow diagrams and only three (3/62, 4.84%) provided trial registration information.

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE

Medical journals in China endorsing either the CONSORT Statement or the ICMJE's URM constituted a small percentage of the total; all of these journals used ambiguous language regarding what was expected of authors.

Quality of reporting in randomized controlled trials conducted in China on the treatment of cancer pain

BACKGROUND

Research in China has been rapidly gaining momentum, but as yet there is no systematic evaluation of quality of reporting in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the treatment of cancer pain conducted in China. Therefore, an assessment in this field is an imperative issue.

METHODS

A PubMed search of reports published between 1994 and 2009 followed by an examination and critical appraisal of reporting in RCTs on the treatment of cancer pain was conducted in China. All reports had been examined to describe their general characteristics and evaluate the quality of their reporting. Quality of reporting was assessed against a subset of criteria adapted from the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement.

RESULTS

A total of 46 RCTs were included in full text. The frequency of RCTs was found to increase over time: from one (2.2%) in 1994-1997 to 28 (60.9%) in 2006-2009. There were fewer papers published in this field in foreign journals, as funding sources and opportunities for collaborative research with foreigners are still limited. Visual analogue scales were the main method of cancer pain evaluation (19 reports; 41.4%). Only 12 studies (26.1%) are deemed to have authentic randomization and 36 papers (78.3%) provided no information about blinding of either participants or investigators. In 22 papers (47.8%), there was no information about the length of time for which participants were followed. Only 15 (32.6%) of the included trials reported approval by an ethics committee and 17 (37.0%) adequately discussed informed consent.

CONCLUSION

The quality of reporting in RCTs on the treatment of cancer pain conducted in China needs to be improved. Three critical steps should be strictly conducted including randomization, blinding and follow-up. Reporting of RCTs in this field conducted in China should meet and keep up with the standards of CONSORT statement.

Publication guidelines need widespread adoption

OBJECTIVE

During the past two decades teams of researchers and editors have developed a variety of publishing guidelines to improve the quality of published research reports. Journals and editorial groups have adopted many of these guidelines. Whereas some guidelines are widely used, others have yet to be generally applied, thwarting attainment of consistent reporting among published research reports. The aim of this study is to describe the development and adoption of general publication guidelines for various study designs, provide examples of guidelines adapted for specific topics, and recommend next steps.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We reviewed generic guidelines for reporting research results and surveyed their use in PubMed and Science Citation Index.

RESULTS

Existing guidelines cover a broad spectrum of research designs, but there are still gaps in topics and use. Appropriate next steps include increasing use of available guidelines and their adoption among journals, educating peer reviewers on their use, and incorporating guideline use into the curriculum of medical, nursing, and public health schools.

CONCLUSION

Wider adoption of existing guidelines should result in research that is increasingly reported in a standardized, consistent manner.

What can we learn from Chinese randomized controlled trials? A systematic review and meta-analysis of Chinese venlafaxine studies

This systematic review evaluated Chinese trials examining the efficacy of venlafaxine in the treatment of depression. Chinese databases CNKI and VIP and western databases were searched for blinded randomized controlled trial publications comparing venlafaxine to other antidepressants or placebo (in English or Chinese). Trials had to establish diagnosis of depression according to the Chinese Classification of Mental Disorders, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or International Classification of Diseases. Studies were excluded if more than 20% of participants had a primary diagnosis of dysthymia or if more than 15% had a primary diagnosis of bipolar disorder. Effect sizes were calculated as Hedges' g for rating scale scores and Mantel-Haenszel risk ratios (MH RR) for response and remission data. Effect sizes were combined in a fixed-effects model. A total of 25 studies were included. Nine trials compared venlafaxine to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor; placebo-controlled trials were lacking. Quality was at best modest, and all trials were underpowered. There were more responders (MH RR, 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.15) and remitters (MH RR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.02-1.24) in venlafaxine groups compared with those in tricyclic antidepressant group. Hamilton Depression Rating Scale end point scores in the venlafaxine groups were lower (Hedges' g = 0.16; 95% CI, 0.04-0.27), and venlafaxine was better tolerated than tricyclic antidepressant (Hedges' g = 0.56; 95% CI, 0.37-0.74). There were no significant differences between venlafaxine and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor on any of these parameters. Analyses of publication bias were inconclusive. Chinese researchers have published a number of randomized controlled trials comparing venlafaxine to active comparators, but study quality was found to be low. To make optimal use of their research potential Chinese, researchers will have to improve trial reporting and the peer-review process.

Randomized Controlled Trials of Acupuncture (1997-2007): An Assessment of Reporting Quality with a CONSORT- and STRICTA-Based Instrument

The present study describes the development of a comprehensive quality of reporting assessment tool and its application to acupuncture RCTs from 1997-2007. This Oregon CONSORT STRICTA Instrument (OCSI) is based on the revised CONSORT guidelines as modified by the STRICTA recommendations for acupuncture trials. Each of the resulting 27 OCSI items were applied to English language prospective RCTs that compared acupuncture, using manual and/or electro-stimulation, to no treatment, a sham procedure, or usual biomedical care. The 333 RCTs that met inclusion criteria were dispersed among 27 countries and 141 journals. Mean quality of reporting score for all articles was 63.0% (SD 16.5). Mean OCSI scores revealed a 30.9% improvement over the ten-year period (P < .001). Our findings suggest that to enhance quality of reporting, authors should better attend to seven specific OCSI items in three categories: practitioner training, adverse events, and aspects of randomization and blinding (n = 5). The broad diversity in geographical origin, publication site and quality of reporting, viewed in light of the considerable room for improvement in mean OCSI scores, emphasizes the importance of making STRICTA as well as CONSORT more widely known to journals and to the acupuncture research community.

Assessment of the quality of reporting in abstracts of randomized controlled trials published in five leading Chinese medical journals

BACKGROUND

Clear, transparent and sufficiently detailed abstracts of randomized trials (RCTs), published in journal articles are important because readers will often base their initial assessment of a trial on such information. However, little is known about the quality of reporting in abstracts of RCTs published in medical journals in China.

METHODS

We identified RCTs abstracts from 5 five leading Chinese medical journals published between 1998 and 2007 and indexed in MEDLINE. We assessed the quality of reporting of these abstracts based on the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) abstract checklist. We also sought to identify whether any differences exist in reporting between the Chinese and English language version of the same abstract.

RESULTS

We identified 332 RCT abstracts eligible for examination. Overall, the abstracts we examined reported 0-8 items as designated in the CONSORT checklist. On average, three items were reported per abstract. Details of the interventions (288/332; 87%), the number of participants randomized (216/332; 65%) and study objectives (109/332; 33%) were the top three items reported. Only two RCT abstracts reported details of trial registration, no abstracts reported the method of allocation concealment and only one mentioned specifically who was blinded. In terms of the proportion of RCT abstracts fulfilling a criterion, the absolute difference (percentage points) between the Chinese and English abstracts was 10% (ranging from 0 to 25%) on average, per item.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of reporting in abstracts of RCTs published in Chinese medical journals needs to be improved. We hope that the introduction and endorsement of the CONSORT for Abstracts guidelines by journals reporting RCTs will lead to improvements in the quality of reporting.

Guidance for developers of health research reporting guidelines

David Moher and colleagues from the EQUATOR network offer guidance and recommended steps for developing health research reporting guidelines.