Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34480090›Full record

ArticleSpinal cord2021

Clinical trials and tribulations: lessons from spinal cord injury studies registered on ClinicalTrials.gov.

Freda M Warner, Nicole G Bailey, Paulina S Scheuren, Robin Lütolf, Rachel McGregor, Rohan Banga, Jane T C Hsieh, John L K Kramer

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Spinal cord, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

8 authors.

Freda M WarnerFaculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Nicole G BaileyInternational Collaboration on Repair Discoveries (ICORD), University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Paulina S ScheurenSpinal Cord Injury Center, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Robin LütolfSpinal Cord Injury Center, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4635-693X
Rachel McGregorSchool of Kinesiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6088-7665
Rohan BangaInternational Collaboration on Repair Discoveries (ICORD), University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Jane T C HsiehSpinal Cord Injury Center, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
John L K KramerInternational Collaboration on Repair Discoveries (ICORD), University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. kramer@icord.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7722-131X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

designArticle.

objectiveClinicalTrials.gov is an online trial registry that provides public access to information on past, present, and future clinical trials. While increasing transparency in research, the quality of the information provided in trial registrations is highly variable. The objective of this study is to assess key areas of information on ClinicalTrials.gov in interventional trials involving people with spinal cord injuries.

settingInterventional trials on ClinicalTrials.gov involving people with spinal cord injuries.

methodsA subset of data on interventional spinal cord injury trials was downloaded from ClinicalTrials.gov. Reviewers extracted information pertaining to study type, injury etiology, spinal cord injury characteristics, timing, study status, and results.

resultsOf the interventional trial registrations reviewed, 62.5%, 58.6%, and 24.3% reported injury level, severity, and etiology, respectively. The timing of intervention relative to injury was reported in 72.8% of registrations. Most trials identified a valid study status (89.2%), but only 23.5% of those completed studies had posted results.

conclusionsOur review provides a snapshot of interventional clinical trials conducted in the field of spinal cord injury and registered in ClinicalTrials.gov. Areas for improvement were identified with regards to reporting injury characteristics, as well as posting results.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicSpinal Cord InjuriesHumansRegistries

Identifiers

PMID34480090

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.