ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2023
Worldwide Trends in Registering Real-World Studies at ClinicalTrials.gov: A Cross-Sectional Analysis.
Article in International journal of general medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A Review of the Importance and Relevance of Real-World Data and Real-World Evidence.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this study was to characterize real-world studies (RWSs) registered at ClinicalTrials.gov to help investigators better conduct relevant research in clinical practice. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 944 studies was performed on February 28, 2023. Results: A total of 944 studies were included. The included studies involved a total of 48 countries. China was the leading country in terms of the total number of registered studies (37.9%, 358), followed by the United States (19.7%, 186). Regarding intervention type, 42.4% (400) of the studies involved drugs, and only 9.1% (86) of the studies involved devices. Only 8.5% (80) of the studies mentioned both the detailed study design type and data source in the "Brief Summary". A total of 49.4% (466) of studies had a sample size of 500 participants and above. Overall, 63% (595) of the studies were single-center studies. A total of 213 conditions were covered in the included studies. One-third of the studies (32.7%, 309) involved neoplasms (or tumors). China and the United States were very different regarding the study of different conditions. Conclusion: Although the pandemic has provided new opportunities for RWSs, the rigor of scientific research still needs to be emphasized. Special attention needs to be given to the correct and comprehensive description of the study design in the Brief Summary of registered studies, thereby promoting communication and understanding. In addition, deficiencies in ClinicalTrials.gov registration data remain prominent.
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.