ArticleTrials2020
Defining key design elements of registry-based randomised controlled trials: a scoping review.
Article in Trials, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 2 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
32 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Definitions of clinical study outcome measures for cardiovascular diseases: the European Unified Registries for Heart Care Evaluation and Randomized Trials (EuroHeart).European heart journal · 2025Pooled it
- Registry-based randomised controlled trials: conduct, advantages and challenges-a systematic review.Trials · 2024Pooled it
- Trial
- Cohort profile of PLUTO: a perioperative biobank focusing on prediction and early diagnosis of postoperative complications.BMJ open · 2023Trial
- Malignant salivary gland tumors in Brazil: epidemiology, treatment patterns, and survival outcomes in public Brazilian population.Gland surgery · 2026Article
- Article
- Dental Research in the Digital Age: The Registry-Based Clinical Trial.Clinical oral implants research · 2026Article
- Building Real-World Evidence Infrastructure to Improve Health and Healthcare in the United States: Part I-Coordinated Registry Networks and Systemic Coordinated Inter-Organizational Networks.International journal of translational medical research and public health · 2025Article
- End Point Selection in ADPKD Clinical Trials.Kidney international reports · 2025Review
- Article
- Use cases of registry-based randomized controlled trials-A review of the registries' contributions and constraints.Clinical and translational science · 2024Review
- Validity and timeliness of cancer diagnosis data collected during a prospective cohort study and reported by the English and Welsh cancer registries: a retrospective, comparative analysis.The Lancet. Oncology · 2024Observational
- Nephrology Clinical Trials in Learning Health Systems: The Registry-Based Randomized Clinical Trial.Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN · 2024Article
- May the 4th be with you: mixed-methods best-evidence synthesis on 4th-generation alumina-zirconia ceramic bearings in total hip arthroplasty.EFORT open reviews · 2024Article
- Feasibility of embedding orthopaedic clinical trials into national registries: a pilot quality improvement study for the UK Non-Arthroplasty Hip Registry (UK-NAHR).Journal of hip preservation surgery · 2024Article
- Protocol for the ONLOOP trial: pragmatic randomized trial evaluating a province-wide system of personalized reminders for evidence-based surveillance tests in adult survivors of childhood cancer in Ontario.Implementation science : IS · 2024Article
- The value of real world evidence and pragmatic trials in advanced prostate cancer- insights from the electronic Prostate Cancer Australian and Asian Database.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Design, implementation, and inferential issues associated with clinical trials that rely on data in electronic medical records: a narrative review.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Review
- The utility of clinical registries for guiding clinical practice in upper tract urothelial cancer: a narrative review.Translational andrology and urology · 2023Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTraditional randomised controlled trials remain the gold standard for improving clinical care but they do have their limitations, including their associated high costs, high failure rate and limited external validity. An alternative methodology is the newly defined, prospective, registry-based randomised controlled trial (RRCT), where treatment and outcome data is collected in an existing registry. This scoping review explores the current literature regarding RRCTs to help identify the key design elements of RRCTs and the characteristics of clinical registries on which they are reliant on.
methodsA scoping review methodology conducted in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines was performed. Four databases were searched for articles published from inception to June 2018: Medline; Embase; the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and; Scopus. The search strategy included MeSH and text words related to RRCT.
resultsWe identified 2369 articles of which 75 were selected for full-text screening. Of these, only 17 articles satisfied our inclusion criteria. All studies were published between 1996 and 2017 and all were investigator-initiated. Study designs were mainly multi-site comparative/effectiveness studies incorporating the use of disease registries (n = 8), procedure registries (n = 8) and a health services registry (n = 1). The low cost, reduced administrative burden and enhanced external validity of RRCTs make them an attractive research methodology which can be used to address questions of public health importance. We identified that that there are variable definitions of what constituted a RRCT and that issues related to ethical conduct and data integrity, completeness, timeliness, validation and endpoint adjudication need to be carefully addressed.
conclusionRRCTs potentially have an important role to play in informing best clinical practice and health policy. There are a number of issues that need to be addressed to optimise the utility of this approach, including establishing universally accepted criteria for the definition of a RRCT.
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.