ArticleHeart Asia2017
Prevalence of randomised controlled trials in Japanese cardiovascular journals: a descriptive study.
Article in Heart Asia, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLittle is known about the recent proportion and trends of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in Japanese cardiovascular journals. METHODS AND
resultsThis study retrospectively reviewed all original research articles published between 2006 and 2015 in six English-language journals issued by societies related to cardiovascular medicine in Japan. All these journals had been indexed in PubMed for more than 5 years until 2015. We examined the 2-year trends in the prevalence of RCTs, as well as the types of study subjects and interventions investigated. In addition, we applied a multivariable logistic regression analysis to assess the factors related to the publication of RCTs. A total of 7117 articles were eligible for our analyses. The proportion of RCTs among Japanese journals was 3.5% (252/7117). No significant change in the prevalence of RCTs among all included journals was noted (3.8% vs 3.1%, p=0.751). RCTs related to ischaemic heart disease were the most frequently published (85/252, 33.7%). In the multivariable analysis, a male first author (adjusted OR (AOR) 1.97; 95% CI 1.30 to 2.99) and reports from Asia (AOR 1.62; 95% CI 1.19 to 2.21) were significantly associated with the publication of RCTs.
conclusionsIn Japanese cardiovascular journals, RCTs accounted for 3.5% of all original research articles published, and there was no change in the prevalence of RCTs during the study period.
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.