ArticleBMC medicine2020
An evidence mapping and analysis of registered COVID-19 clinical trials in China.
Article in BMC medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Re-analysis of the current status of clinical trial registration in China.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Reporting and methodological quality of COVID-19 systematic reviews needs to be improved: an evidence mapping.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2021Pooled it
- COVID-19-related medical research: a meta-research and critical appraisal.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Pooled it
- Disparities in COVID-19 clinical studies from high-income and low-and middle-income countries.International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases · 2023Article
- Article
- How the clinical research community responded to the COVID-19 pandemic: an analysis of the COVID-19 clinical studies in ClinicalTrials.gov.JAMIA open · 2021Article
- Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19: Perspectives on their failure in repurposing.Journal of clinical pharmacy and therapeutics · 2021Review
- Effects of Tanreqing Capsule on the negative conversion time of nucleic acid in patients with COVID-19: A retrospective cohort study.Journal of integrative medicine · 2021Article
- How the clinical research community responded to the COVID-19 pandemic: An analysis of the COVID-19 clinical studies in ClinicalTrials.gov.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2020Article
- Licorice: A Potential Herb in Overcoming SARS-CoV-2 Infections.Journal of evidence-based integrative medicineReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis article aims to summarize the key characteristics of registered trials of 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19), in terms of their spatial and temporal distributions, types of design and interventions, and patient characteristics among others.
methodsA comprehensive search of the registered COVID-19 trials has been performed on platforms including ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), Chinese Clinical Trials Registry (CHiCTR), Australian Clinical Trials Registry, Britain's National Research Register (BNRR), Current Control Trials (CCT), and Glaxo Smith Kline Register. Trials registered at the first 8 weeks of the COVID-19 outbreak are included, without language restrictions. For each study, the registration information, study design, and administrator information are collected and summarized.
resultsA total of 220 registered trials were evaluated as of February 27, 2020. Hospital-initiated trials were the majority and account for 80% of the sample. Among the trials, pilot studies and phase 4 trials are more common and represent 35% and 19.1% of the sample, respectively. The median sample size of the registered trials is 100, with interquartile range 60-240. Further, 45.9% of the trials mentioned information on a data monitoring committee. 54.5% of the trials did not specify the disease severity among patients they intend to recruit. Four types of interventions are most common in the experimental groups across the registered studies: antiviral drugs, Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), biological agents, and hormone drugs. Among them, the TCM and biological agents are frequently used in pilot study and correspond to a variety of primary endpoints. In contrast, trials with antiviral drugs have more targeted primary outcomes such as "COVID-19 nucleic acid test" and "28-day mortality."
conclusionsWe provide an evidence mapping and analysis of registered COVID-19 clinical trials in China. In particular, it is critical for ongoing and future studies to refine their research hypothesis and better identify their intervention therapies and the corresponding primary outcomes. It is also imperative for multiple public health divisions and research institutions to work together for integrative clinical data capture and sharing, with a common objective of improving future studies that evaluate COVID-19 interventions.
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.