scholarly journals Vasectomy techniques for male sterilization: systematic Cochrane review of randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials

2004 ◽  
Vol 19 (11) ◽  
pp. 2431-2438 ◽  
Author(s):  
L.A. Cook ◽  
H.A.A.M. Van Vliet ◽  
A. Pun ◽  
M.F. Gallo
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Review ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Controlled Clinical Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Male Sterilization

Trends in randomized controlled trials in ENT: a 30-year review

1997 ◽  
Vol 111 (7) ◽  
pp. 611-613 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. W. Ah-See ◽  
N. C. Molony ◽  
A. G. D. Maran
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Controlled Clinical Trials ◽  
Medline Search ◽  
Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled

AbstractThere is a growth in the demand for clinical practice to be evidence based. Recent years have seen a rise in the number of randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTS). Such trials while acknowledged as the gold standard for evidence can be difficult to perform in surgical specialities. We have recently identified a low proportion of RCTS in the otolaryngology literature. Our aim was to identify any trend in the number of published RCTS within the ENT literature over a 30-year period and to identify which areas of our speciality lend themselves to this form of study design. A Medline search of 10 prominent journals published between 1966 and 1995 was performed. Two hundred and ninety-six RCTS were identified. Only five were published before 1980. Two hundred (71 per cent) of RCTS were in the areas of otology and rhinology. An encouraging trend is seen in RCTS within ENT literature.

scholarly journals Enhancing Patient Centricity and Advancing Innovation in Clinical Research with Virtual Randomized Clinical Trials (vRCTs)

Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 151
Author(s):  
Raphael A. Yaakov ◽  
Özgür Güler ◽  
Tim Mayhugh ◽  
Thomas E. Serena
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Regulatory Compliance ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Holistic View ◽  
Health Crisis ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Healthcare Needs

The current public health crisis has highlighted the need to accelerate healthcare innovation. Despite unwavering levels of cooperation among academia, industry, and policy makers, it can still take years to bring a life-saving product to market. There are some obvious limitations, including lack of blinding or masking and small sample size, which render the results less applicable to the real world. Traditional randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are lengthy, expensive, and have a low success rate. There is a growing acknowledgement that the current process no longer fully meets the growing healthcare needs. Advances in technology coupled with proliferation of telehealth modalities, sensors, wearable and connected devices have paved the way for a new paradigm. Virtual randomized controlled trials (vRCTs) have the potential to drastically shorten the clinical trial cycle while maximizing patient-centricity, compliance, and recruitment. This new approach can inform clinical trials in real time and with a holistic view of a patient’s health. This paper provides an overview of virtual clinical trials, addressing critical issues, including regulatory compliance, data security, privacy, and ownership.

The effect of almond intake on lipid profile: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Omid Asbaghi ◽  
Vihan Moodi ◽  
Amir Hadi ◽  
Elham Eslampour ◽  
Mina Shirinbakhshmasoleh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Lipid Profile ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled

A number of clinical trials have examined the effect of almond intake on the lipid profile in recent years; however, the results remain equivocal.

scholarly journals Cochrane Schizophrenia Group’s Study-Based Register of Randomized Controlled Trials: Development and Content Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Farhad Shokraneh ◽  
Clive E Adams
Keyword(s):  
Content Analysis ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Research Policy ◽  
Cochrane Review ◽  
Gis Mapping ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Review Team

Abstract Background Study-based registers facilitate systematic reviews through shortening the process for review team and reducing considerable waste during the review process. Such a register also provides new insights about trends of trials in a sub-specialty. This paper reports development and content analysis of Cochrane Schizophrenia Group’s Study-Based Register. Methods The randomized controlled trials were collected through systematic searches of major information sources. Data points were extracted, curated and classified in the register. We report trends using regression analyses in Microsoft Excel and we used GIS mapping (GunnMap 2) to visualize the geographical distribution of the origin of schizophrenia trials. Results Although only 17% of trials were registered, the number of reports form registered trials is steadily increasing and registered trials produce more reports. Clinical trial registers are main source of trial reports followed by sub-specialty journals. Schizophrenia trials have been published in 23 languages from 90 countries while 105 nations do not have any reported schizophrenia trials. Only 9.7% of trials were included in at least one Cochrane review. Pharmacotherapy is the main target of trials while trials targeting psychotherapy are increasing in a continuous rate. The number of people randomized in trials is on average 114 with 60 being the most frequent sample size. Conclusions Curated datasets within the register uncover new patterns in data that have implications for research, policy, and practice for testing new interventions in trials or systematic reviews.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of radiofrequency ablation for treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 030006052110066
Author(s):  
Hua Zhang ◽  
Bo Wang ◽  
Jie He ◽  
Zhongju Du
Keyword(s):  
Radiofrequency Ablation ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Review ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. Methods A literature review was conducted using the PubMed, Cochrane Review, Embase, and Google Scholar databases. Two reviewers independently assessed the eligibility of all retrieved studies. The research was reported based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to ensure the reliability and verity of the results. The statistical analysis was performed using STATA version 13.0. Results Nine randomized controlled trials were collected for the data extraction and meta-analysis. Significant differences in the pain score at 4, 12, and 24 weeks were found between patients treated with radiofrequency ablation and those treated with placebo. Furthermore, the use of radiofrequency ablation was associated with an improved outcome of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index at 4, 12, and 24 weeks. No serious adverse events were observed in any patients who underwent radiofrequency ablation. Conclusion Radiofrequency ablation is efficacious and safe for reducing pain and improving knee function in patients with knee osteoarthritis, without increasing the risk of adverse effects.

scholarly journals A Review of Marital Intimacy-Enhancing Interventions among Married Individuals

2015 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. 74 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maryam Kardan-Souraki ◽  
Zeinab Hamzehgardeshi ◽  
Ismail Asadpour ◽  
Reza Ali Mohammadpour ◽  
Soghra Khani
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Main Concern ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Marital Intimacy ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
The Impact

<p><strong>BACKGROUND:</strong> Lack of intimacy is currently the main concern rather than main concern of the experts in psychology and counseling. It is considered as one of the most important causes for divorce and as such to improve marital intimacy a great number of interventions have been proposed in the literature. Intimacy training and counseling make the couples take effective and successful steps to increase marital intimacy. No study has reviewed the interventions promoting marital intimacy after marriage. Thus, this review study aimed to classify the articles investigating the impact of interventional programs on marital intimacy after marriage.</p><p><strong>SEARCH METHODS:</strong> In April 2015, we performed a general search in Google Scholar search engines, and then we did an advanced search the databases of Science Direct, ProQuest, SID, Magiran, Irandoc, Pubmed, Scopus, <a href="http://www.cochranelibrary.com/">Cochrane Library</a>, and Psych info; Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL). Also, lists of the references of the relevant articles were reviewed for additional citations. Using Medical Subject Headings (MESH) keywords: Intervention (Clinical Trials, Non-Randomized Controlled Trials, Randomized Controlled Trials, Education), intimacy, marital (Marriage) and selected related articles to the study objective were from 1995 to April 2015. Clinical trials that evaluated one or more behavioral interventions to improve marital intimacy were reviewed in the study.</p><p><strong>MAIN RESULTS:</strong> 39 trials met the inclusion criteria. Eleven interventions had follow-up, and 28 interventions lacked follow-up. The quality evidence for 22 interventions was low, for 15 interventions moderate, and for one intervention was considered high. Findings from studies were categorized in 11 categories as the intimacy promoting interventions in dimensions of emotional, psychological, physical, sexual, temporal, communicational, social and recreational, aesthetic, spiritual, intellectual intimacy, and total intimacy.</p><p><strong>AUTHORS’ CONCLUSIONS:</strong> Improving and promoting communication, problem solving, self-disclosure and empathic response skills and sexual education and counseling in the form of cognitive-behavioral techniques and based on religious and cultural context of each society, an effective step can be taken to enhance marital intimacy and strengthen family bonds and stability. Health care providers should consider which interventions are appropriate to the couple characteristics and their relationships.</p>

scholarly journals High-cited favorable studies for COVID-19 treatments ineffective in large trials

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
John P.A. Ioannidis
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Clinical Studies ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Randomized Trials ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Wide Dissemination ◽  
Highly Cited Articles ◽  
Highly Cited

Importance. COVID-19 has resulted in massive production, publication and wide dissemination of clinical studies trying to identify effective treatments. However, several widely touted treatments failed to show effectiveness in large well-done randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Objective. To evaluate for COVID-19 treatments that showed no benefits in subsequent large RCTs how many of their most-cited clinical studies had declared favorable results for these interventions. Methods. Scopus (last update December 23, 2021) identified articles on lopinavir-ritonavir, hydroxycholoroquine/azithromycin, remdesivir, convalescent plasma, colchicine or interferon (index interventions) that represented clinical trials and that had received >150 citations. Their conclusions were assessed and correlated with study design features. The ten most recent citations for the most-cited article on each index intervention were examined on whether they were critical to the highly-cited study. Altmetric scores were also obtained. Findings. 40 articles of clinical studies on these index interventions had received >150 citations (7 exceeded 1,000 citations). 20/40 (50%) had favorable conclusions and 4 were equivocal. Highly-cited articles with favorable conclusions were rarely RCTs while those without favorable conclusions were mostly RCTs (3/20 vs 15/20, p=0.0003). Only 1 RCT with favorable conclusions had sample size >160. Citation counts correlated strongly with Altmetric scores, in particular news items. Only 9 (15%) of 60 recent citations to the most highly-cited studies with favorable or equivocal conclusions were critical to the highly-cited study. Conclusion. Many clinical studies with favorable conclusions for largely ineffective COVID-19 treatments are uncritically heavily cited and disseminated. Early observational studies and small randomized trials may cause spurious claims of effectiveness that get perpetuated.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document