SynthesisLa Radiologia medica2019
Evaluation of Italian radiotherapy research from 1985 to 2005: preliminary analysis.
Synthesis in La Radiologia medica, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Role of Telemedicine for Psychological Support for Oncological Patients Who Have Received Radiotherapy.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Cancer patients in Covid-19 era: Swimming against the tide.Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe difficulty in conducting meaningful clinical research is a multifactorial issue, involving political, financial and cultural problems, which can lead to unexpected negative long-term consequences, in terms of knowledge advancement and impact on patient care. The aims of the present review were to evaluate the publications of Italian radiotherapy (RT) groups during a 20-year period and to verify whether research is still appealing to young radiation oncologists (ROs) in Italy.
methodsPubMed database was searched for English-language articles published by Italian groups from January 1985 to December 2005. Analyzed variables were: publication/year, kind of study, geographical area and age of the first author.
resultsThe systematic review identified 3291 articles: 1207 papers fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The number of Italian published papers increased during the examined period. Retrospective analyses, prospective phase I-II trials and literature reviews were 44, 20 and 14.5% of all published manuscripts, respectively. Randomized trials showed a mild increase from 2000 to 2005, but their absolute number remained low respect to other types of studies (4%). Northern Italy produced the very most of Italian research papers (58.7%). The age of the first/second author was evaluated on 716 papers: In more than 50% of cases, the first author was younger than 40.
conclusionDespite a general gradual improvement, RT clinical research suffers in Italy (as elsewhere) from insufficient funding, with a negative impact on evidence production. It is worth noting that clinical research is still appealing and accessible to junior Italian RO.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30430384What 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.