Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31583332›Full record

ArticlePain reports

Ethical considerations in the design, execution, and analysis of clinical trials of chronic pain treatments.

Michael C Rowbotham, Michael P McDermott

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pain reports. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

2 authors.

Michael C RowbothamCalifornia Pacific Medical Center Research Institute, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Michael P McDermottCenter for Human Experimental Therapeutics, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIn the field of pain research, clinical trials may randomize over 500 subjects and include more than 150 sites spanning over a dozen countries.

methodsThis review examines the ethical considerations affecting clinical trial design, execution, and analysis of trials for chronic pain. The Belmont Report has been the touchstone for human studies protection efforts since 1979. Commissioned by the U.S. government in response to ethical failures in medical research, such as the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, the report emphasizes 3 basic principles: respect for persons, beneficence, and justice. Trial design and sample size have important ethical implications.

conclusionsMeasures to enhance trial transparency and combat publication and many other types of bias should be implemented.

Indexed as

Belmont ReportClinical trialsEthicsTransparency in research

Identifiers

PMID31583332
PMCPMC6749924

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.