ArticlePloS one2014
Clinical research: a globalized network.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bridging the Gap: The State of Global Transplant Research Collaboration.Transplantation direct · 2025Article
- Descriptive Analysis of Good Clinical Practice Inspection Findings from U.S. Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2022Review
- Trends in clinical trial investigator workforce and turnover: An analysis of the U.S. FDA 1572 BMIS database.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2019Article
- Participants' awareness of ethical compliance, safety and protection during participation in pharmaceutical industry clinical trials: a controlled survey.BMC medical ethics · 2019Article
- Trial registration, publication rate and characteristics in the research field of otology: A cross-sectional study.PloS one · 2019Article
- The patient's safety and access to experimental drugs after the termination of clinical trials: regulations and trends.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2018Article
- Human dignity as a basis for providing post-trial access to healthcare for research participants: a South African perspective.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2018Review
- Article
- Previously unidentified duplicate registrations of clinical trials: an exploratory analysis of registry data worldwide.Systematic reviews · 2016Article
- Participants' perception of pharmaceutical clinical research: a cross-sectional controlled study.Patient preference and adherence · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clinical research has become increasingly globalized, but the extent of globalization has not been assessed. To describe the globalization of clinical research, we used all (n = 13,208) multinational trials registered at ClinicalTrials.gov to analyzed geographic connections among individual countries. Our findings indicate that 95% (n = 185) of all countries worldwide have participated in multinational clinical research. Growth in the globalization of clinical research peaked in 2009, suggesting that the global infrastructure that supports clinical research might have reached its maximum capacity. Growth in the globalization of clinical research is attributable to increased involvement of non-traditional markets, particularly in South America and Asia. Nevertheless, Europe is the most highly interconnected geographic region (60.64% of global connections), and collectively, Europe, North America, and Asia comprise more than 85% of all global connections. Therefore, while the expansion of clinical trials into non-traditional markets has increased over the last 20 years and connects countries across the globe, traditional markets still dominate multinational clinical research, which appears to have reached a maximum global capacity.
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.