Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35176960›Full record

SynthesisHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2022

Assessing the reporting quality of randomized controlled trials on COVID-19 vaccines: a systematic review.

Guanran Zhang, Sirui Kuang, Xiaoli Zhang

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Guanran ZhangKey Laboratory for Experimental Teratology of Ministry of Education, Department of Histology & Embryology, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China.ORCID 0000-0002-6818-0648
Sirui KuangMaster of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Macau University of Science and Technology, Taipa, Macau, China.
Xiaoli ZhangKey Laboratory for Experimental Teratology of Ministry of Education, Department of Histology & Embryology, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This systematic review evaluated the reporting quality of COVID-19 vaccine randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Relevant RCTs published between July 20, 2020 and June 11, 2021 were identified in the PubMed database by two independent reviewers. Study quality was evaluated with the 2010 AND 2001 Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) adherence scores. A total of 22 RCTs were included. The median CONSORT adherence score according to the 2010 criteria was 21 (range, 12-25), thus indicating that 75% of the items in more than half of the RCTs had clear reports. Univariate analysis showed that CONSORT adherence scores were not predicted by category; analysis of variance also showed no significant difference between groups. Our results indicated that the overall quality of COVID-19 vaccine RCTs was very good. Current evidence indicates that a variety of COVID-19 vaccines are effective. No RCTs have reported serious adverse effects such as mortality.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicCOVID-19 VaccinesCONSORT statementCOVID-19 vaccinerandomized controlled trialsreporting qualityreview

Identifiers

PMID35176960
PMCPMC8993078

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.