ReviewSaudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology Association
Quality of gastroenterology research published in Saudi Arabian scientific journals.
Review in Saudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology Association. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Level of Evidence of Dental Research in Saudi Arabia (2000-2020).International journal of dentistry · 2021Article
- Levels of Evidence within Cardiovascular Medicine Research in Saudi Arabia: A Systematic Review.Journal of the Saudi Heart Association · 2021Review
- Article
- Quality assessment of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in Saudi journals from 1997 to 2017.Saudi medical journal · 2019Article
- Level of evidence of abdominal surgery clinical research in Saudi Arabia.Saudi medical journal · 2017Review
- Barriers to research productivity among gastroenterologists and hepatologists in Saudi Arabia.Saudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology AssociationArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsEvidence-based medicine has established itself in the field of gastroenterology. In this study we aim to assess the types of study designs of gastroenterology-related articles published in Saudi scientific journals. PATIENTS AND
methodsAn online review using PubMed was carried out to review gastroenterology-related articles published in six Saudi medical journals in the time interval from 2003 to 2012. To classify the level of evidence in these articles we employed the Oxford's levels of evidence. One-way analysis of variance was used to compare the levels of evidence between published articles.
resultsA total of 721 gastroenterology-related articles were reviewed, of which 591 articles met our inclusion criteria; 80.7% were level IV. The three most common types of studies we encountered were cross-sectional (33.9%), case reports (27.9%), and case series (18.8%). Forty-three percent of the published research was in the field of hepatobiliary and spleen. The total number of articles increased from 260 articles in the 1 st 5-year period (2003-2007) to 330 in the 2 nd period (2008-2012). However, no statistically significant difference in the level of evidence was noted. In Annals of Saudi Medicine Journal, articles with level II increased from 0 to 10% with a P value 0.02.
conclusionIn our review of gastroenterology-related published articles in Saudi scientific journals, we observed an increase in the quantity of articles with the quality and level of evidence remaining unchanged. Further research is recommended to explore different reasons affecting the volume and quality of gastroenterology-related research in Saudi scientific journals.
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.