Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32025594›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of surgery protocols2020

Evaluation of the completeness of interventions reported in published randomized controlled trials in plastic surgery: A cross-sectional review protocol.

Sheridan Evans, Shelby Rauh, Samuel Jellison, Brian Diener, Riaz Agha, Matt Vassar

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of surgery protocols, 2020. 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
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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, 3 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Sheridan EvansOklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, Dept. of Institutional Research, United States.
Shelby RauhOklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, Dept. of Institutional Research, United States.
Samuel JellisonOklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, Dept. of Institutional Research, United States.
Brian DienerOklahoma State University Medical Center, Dept. of General Surgery, United States.
Riaz AghaPlastic Surgery Department, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom.
Matt VassarOklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, Dept. of Institutional Research, United States.
Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences · USChelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust · GBOklahoma State University Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) are critical in developing new therapeutic approaches. Historically, in plastic surgery, RCTs are uncommon as they make up less than 2% of all publications. However there has recently been an increase in RCTs appearing in plastic surgery but the quality of these articles has yet to be assessed. We aim to determine the completeness of intervention reporting in plastic surgery RCTs using the TIDieR checklist.

methodsA search of Pubmed for RCTs published in the top 10 plastic surgery journals as determined by the Google h5-index will be performed by two investigators. All identified articles will be isolated and a random selection of 300 articles will be screened for inclusion in the study by two different investigators. All types of RCTs will be included in this study. Articles will be excluded if they are nonrandomized, observational, follow-up studies, or secondary analyses. Full exclusion criteria can be found within this protocol. Extracted data includes all 12 points of the TIDieR checklist, journal, intervention type, sample size, and funding source. A complete list of what data will be extracted is listed within this protocol. All data extraction will be performed by two independent investigators. All work will be verified by the two investigators and any discrepancies will be resolved via consensus between investigators or with third party adjudication. DISSEMINATION: We plan to publish this review in a peer-reviewed journal. We may also present this review at local and/or national conferences.

Indexed as

Data reportingIntervention reportingPlastic surgeryPlastic surgery in literatureResearch methodology

Identifiers

PMID32025594
PMCPMC6997583
OpenAlexW3000597306

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.