Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35725258›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Mapping Chilean clinical research: a protocol for a scoping review and multiple evidence gap maps.

Javier Bracchiglione, Nicolás Meza, Juan Victor Ariel Franco, Camila Micaela Escobar Liquitay, Sergio R Munoz, Gerard Urrutia, Eva Madrid

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Javier BracchiglioneInterdisciplinary Centre for Health Studies (CIESAL), Universidad de Valparaíso, Valparaiso, Chile.ORCID 0000-0001-8738-2184
Nicolás MezaInterdisciplinary Centre for Health Studies (CIESAL), Universidad de Valparaíso, Valparaiso, Chile nicolas.meza@uv.cl.ORCID 0000-0001-9505-0358
Juan Victor Ariel FrancoInstitute of General Practice, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Camila Micaela Escobar LiquitayResearch Department, Instituto Universitario Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina.ORCID 0000-0002-2903-6870
Sergio R MunozDepartment of Public Health-CIGES, Universidad de La Frontera, Temuco, Chile.ORCID 0000-0001-8383-6599
Gerard UrrutiaBiomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre, Barcelona, Spain.
Eva MadridInterdisciplinary Centre for Health Studies (CIESAL), Universidad de Valparaíso, Valparaiso, Chile.ORCID 0000-0002-8095-5549

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionClinical research broadly aims to influence decision-making in order to promote appropriate healthcare. Funding agencies should prioritise research projects according to needed research topics, methodological and cost-effectiveness considerations, and expected social value. In Chile, there is no local diagnosis regarding recent clinical research that might inform prioritisation for future research funding. This research aims to comprehensively identify and classify Chilean health research studies, elaborating evidence gap maps for the most burdensome local conditions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will search in electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS and WoS) and perform hand searches to retrieve, identify and classify health research studies conducted in Chile or by authors whose affiliations are based in Chile, from 2000 onwards. We will elaborate evidence matrices for the 20 conditions with the highest burden in Chile (according to the Global Burden of Disease 2019) selected from those defined under the General Regime of the Health Guarantees Act. To elaborate the evidence gap maps, we will consider prioritised interventions and core outcome sets. To identify knowledge gaps and estimate redundant research, we will contrast these gap maps with the available international evidence of high or moderate certainty of evidence, for each specific clinical question. For this purpose, we will search systematic reviews using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethical approval is required to conduct this project. We will submit our results in both peer-reviewed journals and scientific conferences. We will aim to disseminate our findings through different academic platforms, social media, local press, among others. The final results will be communicated to local funding agencies and government stakeholders. DISCUSSION: We aim to provide an accurate and up-to-date picture of the research gaps-to be filled by new future findings-and the identification of redundant research, which will constitute relevant information for local decision-makers.

Indexed as

Research DesignChileCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansScoping Reviews as TopicHEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION & MANAGEMENTPUBLIC HEALTHSTATISTICS & RESEARCH METHODS

Identifiers

PMID35725258
PMCPMC9214414

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.