Global mapping of randomized controlled trials in dentistry.

Brazilian dental journal Pub Date : 2024-12-16 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1590/0103-644020246233
Mayara Colpo Prado, Lara Dotto, Bernardo Agostini, Rafael Sarkis-Onofre
{"title":"Global mapping of randomized controlled trials in dentistry.","authors":"Mayara Colpo Prado, Lara Dotto, Bernardo Agostini, Rafael Sarkis-Onofre","doi":"10.1590/0103-644020246233","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This meta-research sought to evaluate the conduct, reporting, and main characteristics of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in dentistry. A search was performed on PubMed for RCTs in dentistry indexed from 31 December 2016 to 31 December 2021. Two reviewers independently screened the studies for the presence of eligibility criteria. Only studies in English were considered. Journal and author data, subject, citation and publishing metrics, reporting, and details of study conduct were collected. A descriptive analysis of the data, a map depicting the number of RCTs per country, and a network graph of scientific collaboration among different countries were presented. We included 844 articles. The main research area was periodontics (16.35%). The highest number of RCTs was attributed to Brazil (16.59%). Authors from the USA established the most links with other countries. Most studies did not report the use of CONSORT (67.89%), the type of randomization (69.31%), or the mechanism used to implement the random allocation sequence (52.37%). However, most studies included \"randomized\" in the title (71.92%) and reported the method for generating a random allocation sequence (65.88%) and blinding (74.88%). RCTs are the basis for clinical decision-making. Our results provide a better view of current RCTs and identify areas that require improvement. Brazil was the country that produced the most RCTs, and the USA was the main collaborator. We emphasize the variability of reporting characteristics and study conduct.</p>","PeriodicalId":101363,"journal":{"name":"Brazilian dental journal","volume":"35 ","pages":"e246233"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11654338/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brazilian dental journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-644020246233","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This meta-research sought to evaluate the conduct, reporting, and main characteristics of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in dentistry. A search was performed on PubMed for RCTs in dentistry indexed from 31 December 2016 to 31 December 2021. Two reviewers independently screened the studies for the presence of eligibility criteria. Only studies in English were considered. Journal and author data, subject, citation and publishing metrics, reporting, and details of study conduct were collected. A descriptive analysis of the data, a map depicting the number of RCTs per country, and a network graph of scientific collaboration among different countries were presented. We included 844 articles. The main research area was periodontics (16.35%). The highest number of RCTs was attributed to Brazil (16.59%). Authors from the USA established the most links with other countries. Most studies did not report the use of CONSORT (67.89%), the type of randomization (69.31%), or the mechanism used to implement the random allocation sequence (52.37%). However, most studies included "randomized" in the title (71.92%) and reported the method for generating a random allocation sequence (65.88%) and blinding (74.88%). RCTs are the basis for clinical decision-making. Our results provide a better view of current RCTs and identify areas that require improvement. Brazil was the country that produced the most RCTs, and the USA was the main collaborator. We emphasize the variability of reporting characteristics and study conduct.

牙科随机对照试验的全球制图。
这项荟萃研究旨在评估已发表的牙科随机对照试验(RCT)的实施、报告和主要特征。我们在PubMed上检索了2016年12月31日至2021年12月31日期间收录的牙科随机对照试验。两名审稿人独立筛选了符合资格标准的研究。仅考虑英文研究。收集了期刊和作者数据、主题、引用和出版指标、报告和研究进行的详细情况。我们对数据进行了描述性分析,并绘制了每个国家的 RCT 数量图和不同国家间的科学合作网络图。我们共收录了 844 篇文章。主要研究领域是牙周病学(16.35%)。研究性临床试验数量最多的国家是巴西(16.59%)。来自美国的作者与其他国家建立的联系最多。大多数研究未报告CONSORT的使用情况(67.89%)、随机化类型(69.31%)或随机分配序列的实施机制(52.37%)。不过,大多数研究在标题中包含 "随机"(71.92%),并报告了随机分配序列的生成方法(65.88%)和盲法(74.88%)。临床试验是临床决策的基础。我们的研究结果让人们对目前的 RCT 有了更清楚的认识,并找出了需要改进的地方。巴西是开展 RCT 最多的国家,美国是主要的合作国。我们强调了报告特点和研究行为的差异性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信