Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20009954›Full record

ReviewJournal of investigative medicine : the official publication of the American Federation for Clinical Research2010

Randomized clinical trials in stroke research.

Chul Ahn, Daniel Ahn

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of investigative medicine : the official publication of the American Federation for Clinical Research, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Review
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

2 authors.

Chul AhnDepartment of Clinical Sciences, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, Dallas, TX 75390-9066, USA. chul.ahn@utsouthwestern.edu
Daniel Ahn

Funding

NORTH AND CENTRAL TEXAS CTSA FOR PEDIATRIC RESEARCHUL1RR024982 · NCRR · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI TOTO, ROBERT DANIEL · 2007 to 2011
$27.9M
NCRR NIH HHS UL1 RR024982
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A randomized clinical trial is widely regarded as the most rigorous study design to determine the efficacy of intervention because spurious causality and bias associated with other experimental designs can be avoided. The purpose of this article is to provide clinicians and clinical researchers the types of randomized clinical trials used in stroke studies and to discuss the advantages and the limitations for each type of randomized stroke clinical trials.

Indexed as

Cluster AnalysisCross-Over StudiesHumansInformed ConsentMathematical ConceptsRandom AllocationRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicStroke

Identifiers

PMID20009954
PMCPMC2837939

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.