Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28085789›Full record

SynthesisRegional anesthesia and pain medicine

Reporting of Design Features and Analysis Details in Randomized Clinical Trials of Procedural Treatments for Cancer Pain: An ACTTION Systematic Review.

Daniel Rothstein, Rachel A Kitt, Shannon M Smith, Salahadin Abdi, Mitchell P Engle, Michael P McDermott, Srinivasa N Raja, Dennis C Turk, Robert H Dworkin, Jennifer S Gewandter

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Regional anesthesia and pain medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 99% of its field
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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Daniel RothsteinFrom the *Department of Pain Medicine, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Departments of †Anesthesiology and ‡Biostatistics and Computational Biology, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY; §Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD; and ∥Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
Rachel A Kitt
Shannon M Smith
Salahadin Abdi
Mitchell P Engle
Michael P McDermott
Srinivasa N Raja
Dennis C Turk
Robert H Dworkin
Jennifer S Gewandter
University of Rochester · USThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USJohns Hopkins University · USUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks (ACTTION) Public-Private PartnershipU01FD005936 · FDA · UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER · PI DWORKIN, ROBERT H · 2016 to 2020
$2.5M
FDA HHS U01 FD005936
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesThe objective of this study was to assess the reporting of randomized clinical trials investigating procedural treatments (eg, nerve blocks, targeted drug delivery) for cancer pain, with a focus on aspects that are particularly challenging in these trials.

methodsThis article presents results from a systematic review of reporting of randomized clinical trials of procedural interventions for cancer pain. Articles were identified by searching PubMed from 1966 to June 2014. Data related to quality of reporting are presented for early (1985-2004) and late periods (2005-2014).

resultsA total of 35 published trials were included. Approximately two-thirds of the articles clearly indicated the level of blinding. Only 26% reported a primary outcome measure. Less than half explicitly reported the number of patients who completed the trial, and only 1 reported a method that was used to accommodate missing data. Almost one-third of articles included a responder analysis, all of which specified the definition of a responder.

conclusionsThe goal of highlighting these deficiencies in reporting is to promote transparent reporting of details affecting the completion and interpretation of procedural cancer pain trials so that their quality can be more easily evaluated.

Indexed as

Cancer PainHumansNeoplasmsPain ManagementRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID28085789
PMCPMC6784314
OpenAlexW2579469979

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.