评估过去 20 年中有关疤痕的随机对照试验中的研究废物和特征:一项横断面研究。

IF 3.6 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Hongrui Chen, Zening Huang, Bin Sun, Chen Hua, Xiaoxi Lin
{"title":"评估过去 20 年中有关疤痕的随机对照试验中的研究废物和特征:一项横断面研究。","authors":"Hongrui Chen, Zening Huang, Bin Sun, Chen Hua, Xiaoxi Lin","doi":"10.1093/postmj/qgae082","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To analyze the changes in the characteristics of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the field of scarring over the last two decades, unveil the components of research waste (RW) within these RCTs, and identify targets for improvement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A search was conducted on ClinicalTrials.gov for RCTs registered from January 2000 to December 2023, using \"scar\" as the keyword. The search was carried out in January 2024.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>391 RCTs were included in this analysis. The global registration of RCTs in scarring has exhibited a consistent increase annually, with the proportion in Asia gradually rising, while the shares in North America and Europe have demonstrated a declining trend. In the analysis of RW, 232 RCTs were included, of which 96 (41.4%) have been published. Among the published RCTs, 56 (58.3%) were evaluated to have sufficient reporting, while 47 RCTs (48.9%) were identified as having avoidable design flaws. Ultimately, 183 RCTs (78.9%) exhibited at least one form of RW. Multicenter design (OR: 3.324, 95%CI: 1.385-7.975, P = 0.018), non-pharmacological interventions (OR: 2.61, 95%CI: 1.253-5.435, P = 0.010), the absence of external funding (OR: 0.325, 95%CI: 0.144-0.732, P = 0.031), and participant numbers exceeding 50 (OR: 3.269, 95%CI: 1.573-6.794, P = 0.002) were identified as independent protective factors against waste.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study delineates the changes in the characteristics of scar RCTs globally over the past two decades, uncovering a substantial burden of RW in scarring research. It provides an evidential reference for more rational planning of future scar-related RCTs and for minimizing RW.</p>","PeriodicalId":20374,"journal":{"name":"Postgraduate Medical Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating research waste and traits among randomized controlled trials of scars over the past 20 years: a cross-sectional study.\",\"authors\":\"Hongrui Chen, Zening Huang, Bin Sun, Chen Hua, Xiaoxi Lin\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/postmj/qgae082\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To analyze the changes in the characteristics of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the field of scarring over the last two decades, unveil the components of research waste (RW) within these RCTs, and identify targets for improvement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A search was conducted on ClinicalTrials.gov for RCTs registered from January 2000 to December 2023, using \\\"scar\\\" as the keyword. The search was carried out in January 2024.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>391 RCTs were included in this analysis. The global registration of RCTs in scarring has exhibited a consistent increase annually, with the proportion in Asia gradually rising, while the shares in North America and Europe have demonstrated a declining trend. In the analysis of RW, 232 RCTs were included, of which 96 (41.4%) have been published. Among the published RCTs, 56 (58.3%) were evaluated to have sufficient reporting, while 47 RCTs (48.9%) were identified as having avoidable design flaws. Ultimately, 183 RCTs (78.9%) exhibited at least one form of RW. Multicenter design (OR: 3.324, 95%CI: 1.385-7.975, P = 0.018), non-pharmacological interventions (OR: 2.61, 95%CI: 1.253-5.435, P = 0.010), the absence of external funding (OR: 0.325, 95%CI: 0.144-0.732, P = 0.031), and participant numbers exceeding 50 (OR: 3.269, 95%CI: 1.573-6.794, P = 0.002) were identified as independent protective factors against waste.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study delineates the changes in the characteristics of scar RCTs globally over the past two decades, uncovering a substantial burden of RW in scarring research. It provides an evidential reference for more rational planning of future scar-related RCTs and for minimizing RW.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20374,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Postgraduate Medical Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Postgraduate Medical Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/postmj/qgae082\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Postgraduate Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/postmj/qgae082","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:分析过去二十年来瘢痕领域随机对照试验(RCT)特征的变化,揭示这些RCT中研究浪费(RW)的组成部分,并确定改进的目标:方法:以 "瘢痕 "为关键词,在 ClinicalTrials.gov 网站上搜索 2000 年 1 月至 2023 年 12 月间注册的 RCT。搜索于 2024 年 1 月进行:本次分析共纳入 391 项研究性试验。全球登记的瘢痕RCT呈逐年上升趋势,亚洲的比例逐渐上升,而北美和欧洲的比例呈下降趋势。在 RW 分析中,共纳入 232 项 RCT,其中 96 项(41.4%)已发表。在已发表的研究性临床试验中,56 项(58.3%)被评估为报告充分,47 项(48.9%)被确定为存在可避免的设计缺陷。最终,183 项研究性试验(78.9%)显示出至少一种形式的 RW。多中心设计(OR:3.324,95%CI:1.385-7.975,P = 0.018)、非药物干预(OR:2.61,95%CI:1.253-5.435,P = 0.010)、无外部资助(OR:0.325,95%CI:0.144-0.732,P = 0.031)和参与者人数超过 50 人(OR:3.269,95%CI:1.573-6.794,P = 0.002)被确定为防止浪费的独立保护因素:本研究描述了过去二十年中全球瘢痕 RCT 特征的变化,揭示了瘢痕研究中 RW 的巨大负担。它为更合理地规划未来的疤痕相关 RCT 和最大限度地减少 RW 提供了证据参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluating research waste and traits among randomized controlled trials of scars over the past 20 years: a cross-sectional study.

Purpose: To analyze the changes in the characteristics of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the field of scarring over the last two decades, unveil the components of research waste (RW) within these RCTs, and identify targets for improvement.

Methods: A search was conducted on ClinicalTrials.gov for RCTs registered from January 2000 to December 2023, using "scar" as the keyword. The search was carried out in January 2024.

Results: 391 RCTs were included in this analysis. The global registration of RCTs in scarring has exhibited a consistent increase annually, with the proportion in Asia gradually rising, while the shares in North America and Europe have demonstrated a declining trend. In the analysis of RW, 232 RCTs were included, of which 96 (41.4%) have been published. Among the published RCTs, 56 (58.3%) were evaluated to have sufficient reporting, while 47 RCTs (48.9%) were identified as having avoidable design flaws. Ultimately, 183 RCTs (78.9%) exhibited at least one form of RW. Multicenter design (OR: 3.324, 95%CI: 1.385-7.975, P = 0.018), non-pharmacological interventions (OR: 2.61, 95%CI: 1.253-5.435, P = 0.010), the absence of external funding (OR: 0.325, 95%CI: 0.144-0.732, P = 0.031), and participant numbers exceeding 50 (OR: 3.269, 95%CI: 1.573-6.794, P = 0.002) were identified as independent protective factors against waste.

Conclusions: This study delineates the changes in the characteristics of scar RCTs globally over the past two decades, uncovering a substantial burden of RW in scarring research. It provides an evidential reference for more rational planning of future scar-related RCTs and for minimizing RW.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Postgraduate Medical Journal
Postgraduate Medical Journal 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
2.00%
发文量
131
审稿时长
2.5 months
期刊介绍: Postgraduate Medical Journal is a peer reviewed journal published on behalf of the Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine. The journal aims to support junior doctors and their teachers and contribute to the continuing professional development of all doctors by publishing papers on a wide range of topics relevant to the practicing clinician and teacher. Papers published in PMJ include those that focus on core competencies; that describe current practice and new developments in all branches of medicine; that describe relevance and impact of translational research on clinical practice; that provide background relevant to examinations; and papers on medical education and medical education research. PMJ supports CPD by providing the opportunity for doctors to publish many types of articles including original clinical research; reviews; quality improvement reports; editorials, and correspondence on clinical matters.
×
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