ArticleBMJ global health2022
Data flow within global clinical trials: a scoping review.
Article in BMJ global health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Examining developer perspectives on medical AI regulatory frameworks.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- A decade of review in global regulation and research of artificial intelligence medical devices (2015-2025).Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Mutuality as a method: advancing a social paradigm for global mental health through mutual learning.Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology · 2024Article
- Towards achieving transnational research partnership equity: lessons from implementing adaptive platform trials in low- and middle-income countries.Wellcome open research · 2023Article
- Placebos in Schizophrenia Research: An Historical Overview and Introduction to Ethical Issues.Schizophrenia bulletin open · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo document clinical trial data flow in global clinical trials published in major journals between 2013 and 2021 from Global South to Global North.
designScoping analysis
methodsWe performed a search in Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) to retrieve randomised clinical trials published between 2013 and 2021 from
resultsOf 1993 records initially retrieved, 517 studies underwent abstract screening, 348 studies underwent full-text screening and 305 studies were included. Funders from high-income countries were the sole funders of the majority (82%) of clinical trials that recruited across income groupings. In 224 (73.4%) of all assessable studies, data flowed exclusively to authors affiliated with high-income countries or to a majority of authors affiliated with high-income countries for statistical analysis. Only six (3.2%) studies demonstrated data flow to lower middle-income countries and upper middle-income countries for analysis, with only one with data flow to a lower middle-income country.
conclusionsGlobal clinical trial data flow demonstrates a Global South to Global North trajectory. Policies should be re-examined to assess how data sharing across country income groupings can move towards a more equitable model.
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.