Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36874727›Full record

ReviewCureus2023

Assessment of Reporting Quality of Drug-Related Randomized Controlled Trials Conducted in India and Published in MEDLINE-Indexed Indian Journals Over a Decade: A Systematic Review.

Madhusudan P Singh, Meenalotchini G Prakash, Nitin R Gaikwad, Yogendra N Keche, Suryaprakash Dhaneria

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2023. 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. Review
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.

Madhusudan P SinghClinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Raipur, Raipur, IND.
Meenalotchini G PrakashPharmacology and Therapeutics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Raipur, Raipur, IND.
Nitin R GaikwadPharmacology and Therapeutics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Raipur, Raipur, IND.
Yogendra N KechePharmacology and Therapeutics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Raipur, Raipur, IND.
Suryaprakash DhaneriaPharmacology and Therapeutics, Ruxmaniben Deepchand Gardi Medical College, Ujjain, IND.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Poorly published trials may result in biased and erroneous healthcare decisions. We conducted this systematic review to evaluate the reporting quality of drug-related randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in India and published in MEDLINE-indexed Indian journals over a decade (between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2020), as per the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Checklist 2010. An extensive literature search was conducted using the terms "Randomized controlled trial AND India." The full-length papers were extracted for RCTs related to drugs. Two independent investigators assessed each article against the checklist containing 37 criteria. Each article was scored 1 or 0 against each criterion which was finally summed up and evaluated. None of the articles fulfilled all 37 criteria. A compliance rate of >75% was seen in only 15.5% of articles. More than 75% of articles fulfilled a minimum of 16 criteria. Major checklist points observed to be deficient were "important changes to methods after trial commencement" (7%), "interim analysis and stopping guidelines" (7%), and "description of similarity of interventions while blinding" (4%). There remains ample room for improvement regarding research methodology and manuscript preparation in India. Moreover, journals should stringently implement the CONSORT Checklist 2010 to enhance the standard and quality of publications.

Indexed as

adherencecomplianceconsort 2010 statementrandomized controlled trialsreporting quality

Identifiers

PMID36874727
PMCPMC9974383

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.