Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37280050›Full record

ArticleClinical and experimental emergency medicine2024

Overview of clinical study designs.

Seonwoo Kim

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and experimental emergency medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Observational
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. 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

1 author.

Seonwoo KimAcademic Research Service Headquarters, LSK Global PS, Seoul, Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The goal of a clinical study is to determine the factors associated with a disease and to assess the efficacy and safety of an investigational drug, procedure, or device. Since clinical study designs vary due to unique requirements of individual studies, the aims of this report are to educate researchers on the different types of studies and to assist researchers in choosing the optimal study type to fulfill their individual requirements. Clinical studies are classified into the two main types, observational studies and clinical trials, depending on the presence or absence of an intervention. Observational studies include case-control studies, cohort studies, and cross-sectional studies. Case-control and cohort studies may be prospective or retrospective, and case-control studies may be nested or not. Clinical trials may be pragmatic and may be controlled or noncontrolled; randomized or nonrandomized; open label or blinded; and parallel, crossover, or factorial. These observational and clinical trial designs are reviewed. Each type of clinical study has advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, researchers must consider these in choosing the design best suited for achieving their study objectives.

Indexed as

BiasClinical studyClinical trialObservational studyStudy design

Identifiers

PMID37280050
PMCPMC11009715

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.