ReviewEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2009
Children's presence in research. A review of online registers.
Review in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A descriptive analysis of a representative sample of pediatric randomized controlled trials published in 2007.BMC pediatrics · 2010Pooled it
- Drug development: how academia, industry and authorities interact.Nature reviews. Nephrology · 2014Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo determine how many online clinical trial registers include paediatric trial data, how much information is provided, ease of searching for paediatric trials and the accessibility of paediatric trial data in general.
methodsMedline and Google were searched for mention of clinical trial registers in July 2008. All registers considered to be eligible were evaluated for trial information provided, search options available, and number of trials, both total and paediatric. A meta-analytic weighted average of the presence of paediatric trials was calculated and compared to the percentage of published paediatric trial articles in Medline. The paediatric trials in the registers were searched for in the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). All online, freely accessible registers including ongoing trials on different drugs or therapeutic areas, were eligible for review.
resultsTwelve registers were included in the review. All except one provided detailed trial data, while search options varied between registers: seven provided free-text searching, two listed their trials by condition, two provided elaborate search options (age group, condition, study purpose, etc) and one simply listed its trials. Nine of the 12 registers' search facilities made it possible to search for paediatric trials, and these were analysed further: the percentage of paediatric trials in the single registers ranged from 4.8 to 33.3%, and the weighted average was 15% (95% confidence interval 8.2-21.8). The percentage of published, paediatric trial articles was 25%. Of the paediatric trials also searched for in the ICTRP, 66% were found.
conclusionsGreat difficulty was found in retrieving paediatric trials due to the limited and inadequate search functions of the registers reviewed but, in general, the registers seem to represent fewer paediatric trials than those reported in the literature. The ICTRP portal is important for trial accessibility, but it is still in an initial phase and far from representative of the global research situation, especially in the field of paediatrics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
19590865What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.