Abstract
OBJECTIVE--To determine the number, nature, site of publication, and feasibility of identifying randomised controlled trials relevant to primary care. DESIGN--Review of literature using three strategies: approaching journal editors, Medline search, and manual search of individual journals. SETTING--Journals containing publications of studies based in primary care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--The number, site of publication, and subject of trials identified. RESULTS--No journal had a system which enabled identification of all the randomised controlled trials it published. 266 trials relevant to primary care were identified from 110 different journals during 1987-91 by Medline. Of these, only 62 trials were published in primary care journals. Hand searching of seven major primary care research journals showed that between 13% and 38% of the trials had been missed by the Medline search. Of the trials identified, 47 (18%) were concerned with mental disease (including neuroses, tobacco misuse and alcohol misuse) and 43 (16%) were concerned with hypertension. CONCLUSION--Given the diversity of publication sources and topics, this supports the need for a centrally based register of randomised controlled trials that may be relevant to primary care overviews in the future.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Antman E. M., Lau J., Kupelnick B., Mosteller F., Chalmers T. C. A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts. Treatments for myocardial infarction. JAMA. 1992 Jul 8;268(2):240–248. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Chalmers I., Dickersin K., Chalmers T. C. Getting to grips with Archie Cochrane's agenda. BMJ. 1992 Oct 3;305(6857):786–788. doi: 10.1136/bmj.305.6857.786. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Chalmers I., Hetherington J., Newdick M., Mutch L., Grant A., Enkin M., Enkin E., Dickersin K. The Oxford Database of Perinatal Trials: developing a register of published reports of controlled trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986 Dec;7(4):306–324. doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(86)90038-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Chalmers I. Underreporting research is scientific misconduct. JAMA. 1990 Mar 9;263(10):1405–1408. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Dickersin K., Hewitt P., Mutch L., Chalmers I., Chalmers T. C. Perusing the literature: comparison of MEDLINE searching with a perinatal trials database. Control Clin Trials. 1985 Dec;6(4):306–317. doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(85)90106-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hetherington J., Dickersin K., Chalmers I., Meinert C. L. Retrospective and prospective identification of unpublished controlled trials: lessons from a survey of obstetricians and pediatricians. Pediatrics. 1989 Aug;84(2):374–380. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Verstraete M. Registry of Prospective Clinical Trials--Sixth Report. Thromb Haemost. 1984 Apr 30;51(2):283–290. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]