Understanding clinical trials.

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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

1. Acupuncture for depression: a critique of the evidence base.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2011
   Pooled it
2. The effects of information framing on the practices of physicians.Journal of general internal medicine · 1999
   Pooled it
3. Randomized trial evaluating the framing of cardiovascular risk and its impact on blood pressure control [ISRCTN87597585].BMC health services research · 2001
   Trial
4. Same information, different decisions: the influence of evidence on the management of hypertension in the elderly.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 1996
   Trial
5. Adaptation of Clinical Research Staff to Decentralized Clinical Trials and Impacts on the Patient-Centered Experience: Qualitative Interview Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025
   Article
6. Historical Review of the Use of Relative Risk Statistics in the Portrayal of the Purported Hazards of High LDL Cholesterol and the Benefits of Lipid-Lowering Therapy.Cureus · 2023
   Review
7. Beyond the Evidence of the New Hypertension Guidelines. Blood pressure measurement - is it good enough for accurate diagnosis of hypertension? Time might be in, for a paradigm shift (I).Current controlled trials in cardiovascular medicine · 2005
   Article
8. Reporting of numerical and statistical differences in abstracts: improving but not optimal.Journal of general internal medicine · 2002
   Article
9. Applying the results of clinical trials to patients to general practice: perceived problems, strengths, assumptions, and challenges for the future.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 1998
   Article
10. Teaching physicians about different measures of risk reduction may alter their treatment preference.Sozial- und Praventivmedizin · 1998
    Article
11. A general practice-based study examining the absolute risk of cardiovascular disease in treated hypertensive patients.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 1996
    Article
12. What constitutes controlled hypertension? Patient based comparison of hypertension guidelines.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 1996
    Article
13. Evidence based purchasing: understanding results of clinical trials and systematic reviews.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 1995
    Article
14. Conveying the benefits and risks of treatment.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 1995
    Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Influence of method of reporting study results on decision of physicians to prescribe drugs to lower cholesterol concentration.1994

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as