Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36594496›Full record

SynthesisThe American journal of sports medicine2023

The Influence of Industry Affiliation on Randomized Controlled Trials of Platelet-Rich Plasma for Knee Osteoarthritis.

Canhnghi N Ta, Rajiv Vasudevan, Brendon C Mitchell, Robert A Keller, William T Kent

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The American journal of sports medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Academic Influence and Industry Funding in Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections: Coauthorship Network Analysis.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Canhnghi N TaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California, San Diego, San Diego, California, USA.
Rajiv VasudevanSchool of Medicine, University of California, San Diego, San Diego, California, USA.
Brendon C MitchellDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California, San Diego, San Diego, California, USA.
Robert A KellerOrthoCarolina, Charlotte, North Carolina, USA.
William T KentDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California, San Diego, San Diego, California, USA.
University of California, San Diego · USOrthoCarolina · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIndustry funding and corporate sponsorship have played a significant role in the advancement of orthopaedic research and technology. However, this relationship raises concerns for how industry association may bias research findings and influence clinical practice. PURPOSE: To determine whether industry affiliation plays a role in the outcomes of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating platelet-rich plasma (PRP). STUDY

designMeta-analysis; Level of evidence, 2.

methodsA search of the PubMed, Cochrane, and MEDLINE databases for RCTs published between 2011 and the present comparing PRP versus hyaluronic acid, corticosteroid, or placebo for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis was performed. To determine industry affiliation, the conflict of interest, funding, and disclosure sections of publications were assessed, and all authors were assessed through the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons disclosure database and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services open payments database. Studies were classified as industry affiliated (IA) or non-industry affiliated (NIA). The outcomes of each study were rated as favorable, analogous, or unfavorable according to predefined criteria.

resultsA total of 37 studies (6 IA and 31 NIA) were available for analysis. Overall, 19 studies (51.4%) reported PRP as favorable compared with other treatment options, while 18 studies (48.6%) showed no significant differences between PRP and other treatment methods. There was no significant difference in qualitative conclusions between the IA and NIA groups, with the IA group having 3 favorable studies and 3 analogous studies and the NIA group having 16 favorable studies and 15 analogous studies (

conclusionThe results of this study demonstrated that qualitative conclusions and outcome scores were found to not be associated with industry affiliation. Although the results of this study suggest that there is no influence of industry involvement on RCTs examining PRP, it is still necessary to carefully evaluate pertinent commercial affiliations when reviewing recommendations from studies before adopting new treatment approaches, such as the use of PRP for knee osteoarthritis.

Indexed as

Osteoarthritis, KneePlatelet-Rich PlasmaHumansHyaluronic AcidInjections, Intra-ArticularRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeHyaluronic Acidindustry affiliationindustry associationknee osteoarthritisplatelet-rich plasmarandomized controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID36594496
PMCPMC10623604
OpenAlexW4313453693

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.