Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16040885›Full record

ArticleArchives of disease in childhood2005

Understanding randomised controlled trials.

A K Akobeng

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of disease in childhood, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 159 papers, 34 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
159citing papers in PubMed, 34 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

159 citing papers in PubMed, 34 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. A systematic review and meta-analysis of eating disorder preventative interventions in schools.European eating disorders review : the journal of the Eating Disorders Association · 2025
    Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Reporting quality of surgical randomised controlled trials in head and neck cancer: a systematic review.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2021
    Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Core outcomes in neonatology: development of a core outcome set for neonatal research.Archives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition · 2020
    Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Pooled it
  20. Pooled it

99 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

A K AkobengDepartment of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Central Manchester and Manchester Children's University Hospitals, Charlestown Road, Blackley, Manchester, M9 7AA, UK. tony.akobeng@cmmc.nhs.uk

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The hierarchy of evidence in assessing the effectiveness of interventions or treatments is explained, and the gold standard for evaluating the effectiveness of interventions, the randomised controlled trial, is discussed. Issues that need to be considered during the critical appraisal of randomised controlled trials, such as assessing the validity of trial methodology and the magnitude and precision of the treatment effect, and deciding on the applicability of research results, are discussed. Important terminologies such as randomisation, allocation concealment, blinding, intention to treat, p values, and confidence intervals are explained.

Indexed as

Child WelfarePediatricsChildComprehensionDecision MakingEvidence-Based MedicineHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID16040885
PMCPMC1720509

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.