ArticleTrials2010
Multicenter data acquisition made easy.
Article in Trials, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00815698 (Effect of Suture for Mesh Fixation in Lichtenstein Hernia Repair, a Prospective Controlled Randomized Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
Effect of Suture for Mesh Fixation in Lichtenstein Hernia Repair, a Prospective Controlled Randomized Trial
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- What is the preferred mesh placement in primary ventral hernia repair? An international survey of 442 surgeons.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2025Observational
- Prognostic significance of lymph node yield and lymph node ratio in patients affected by squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity and oropharynx: Study protocol for a prospective, multicenter, observational study.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2019Article
- Article
- Health information management and perceptions of the quality of care for children with tracheotomy: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe process for data collection in multicenter trials may be troublesome and expensive. We report our experience with the spreadsheet function in Googledocs for this purpose.
methodsIn Googledocs the data manager creates a form similar to the paper case record form, which will function as a decentral data entry module. When the forms are submitted, they are presented in a spreadsheet in Googledocs, which can be exported to different standard spreadsheet formats.
resultsFor a multicenter randomized clinical trial with five different participating hospitals we created a decentral data entry module using the spreadsheet function in Googledocs. The study comprised 332 patients (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00815698) with five visits per patient. One person at each study site entered data from the original paper based case report forms which were kept at the study sites as originals. We did not experience any technical problems using the system.
conclusionsThe system allowed for decentral data entry, and it was easy to use, safe, and free of charge. The spreadsheet function in Googledocs may potentially replace current expensive solutions for data acquisition in multicenter trials.
trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov NCT00815698.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.