ArticleActa medica Philippina2026
Bibliometric Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials in the Philippines.
Article in Acta medica Philippina, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background and Objective: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are essential for advancing evidence-based healthcare by evaluating the effectiveness and safety of health interventions. Despite the increasing recognition of clinical research, the Philippines has had limited contributions to global RCT output. This bibliometric analysis aims to assess the trends, characteristics, and impact of RCTs conducted in the Philippines and published online. Methods: A systematic search of Medline (PubMed), and EMBASE, along with Acta Medica Philippina, was conducted to identify published RCTs from January 1990 to October 2022. Eligible studies were screened and analyzed based on publication trends, funding sources, study designs, research settings, and institutional contributions. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize key findings. Results: A total of 391 RCTs were identified, with a notable increase in number of RCTs published over time. Most studies (91.8%) were published in international journals, and funding was primarily sourced from pharmaceutical companies (47.1%). The predominant RCT design was two-arm parallel (64.7%), with hospitals being the most common research setting (54.2%). Research areas were led by infectious diseases, particularly vaccine-preventable illnesses (23.8%). While the University of the Philippines Manila (21.1%) and the Research Institute for Tropical Medicine (13.7%) were the leading institutions in terms of highest number of published RCTs, foreign authors accounted for nearly half (47.3%) of primary authorships. The most cited studies focused on cardiovascular diseases, infectious diseases, and oncology. Conclusion: The increasing number of published RCTs in the Philippines reflects growth in research capacity and institutional engagement. Strengthening national research dissemination platforms and fostering regional collaborations will be essential in advancing the Philippines' contribution to global clinical research.
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.