Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29904188›Full record

ReviewSpinal cord2018

A mapping review of randomized controlled trials in the spinal cord injury research literature.

Amanda McIntyre, Brooke Benton, Shannon Janzen, Jerome Iruthayarajah, Joshua Wiener, Janice J Eng, Robert Teasell, and the Spinal Cord Injury Research Evidence Team

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Spinal cord, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
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

8 authors.

Amanda McIntyreLawson Health Research Institute, St. Joseph's Parkwood Institute, London, Ontario, Canada. Amanda.McIntyre@sjhc.london.on.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0992-0909
Brooke BentonLawson Health Research Institute, St. Joseph's Parkwood Institute, London, Ontario, Canada.
Shannon JanzenLawson Health Research Institute, St. Joseph's Parkwood Institute, London, Ontario, Canada.
Jerome IruthayarajahLawson Health Research Institute, St. Joseph's Parkwood Institute, London, Ontario, Canada.
Joshua WienerLawson Health Research Institute, St. Joseph's Parkwood Institute, London, Ontario, Canada.
Janice J EngDepartment of Physical Therapy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Robert TeasellLawson Health Research Institute, St. Joseph's Parkwood Institute, London, Ontario, Canada.
and the Spinal Cord Injury Research Evidence Team

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

designMapping Review.

objectiveThe objective of this study was to map out and characterize the quantity and quality of all published spinal cord injury (SCI) randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with respect to number, sample size, and methodological quality between January 1970 and December 2016.

settingNot applicable.

methodsA literature search of multiple research databases was conducted. Studies adhering to the following criteria were included: the research design was an RCT; written in English; participants were >18 years; and the sample was >50% SCI. Data were extracted pertaining to author(s), year of publication, country of origin, initial and final sample size, intervention, and control. Methodological quality was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) tool. Data was assessed overall and by each year of publication.

resultsIn total, 466 RCTs were published 1971-2016 on 29 primary topic areas, with Bladder (n = 78, 16.7%) most common, followed by Pain (n = 54, 11.6%), and Lower Limb (n = 45, 9.7%). Studies were published in 172 unique journals, with the most common being Spinal Cord (n = 68, 14.6%). The most common producer of studies was the United States (n = 191, 41.0%). RCT publications increased linearly until 2012 when the rate tripled, resulting in 40.8% published 2012-2016. A total of 247 (59.4%) RCTs had <30 subjects; there was no change in sample size over time (p = 0.770). The overall mean PEDro score was 5.56 (1.68); scores improved from 5.0 (1.4) in 1976 to 6.3 (1.9) in 2016 (F = 2.230, p < 0.001).

conclusionsThe number of SCI RCTs and their associated sample size remains low; however, methodological quality has improved over time.

Indexed as

BibliometricsHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSpinal Cord Injuries

Identifiers

PMID29904188

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.