Trial Outcomes & Findings for Impact of Adding a Limitation Section in Abstract of Systematic Review (NCT NCT01848782)
NCT ID: NCT01848782
Last Updated: 2024-05-17
Results Overview
we ask participants: "how confident are you in the results of this study?", with the choice of answer based on a 10 points Likert scale (score from 0, not at all confident, to 10, very confident )
Recruitment status
COMPLETED
Study phase
NA
Target enrollment
300 participants
Primary outcome timeframe
1 month
Results posted on
2024-05-17
Participant Flow
Participant milestones
| Measure |
Abstract With Limitation Section Added
we add a limitation section in each selected abstract, the limitation section will focus on the quality of included studies.
interpretation of the abstract of the systematic review
|
Abstract Without Limitation Section
We selected 30 abstracts with a conclusion in favour the experimental treatment from a sample of systematic reviews that evaluate the effect of health care intervention.
interpretation of the abstract of the systematic review
|
|---|---|---|
|
Overall Study
STARTED
|
150
|
150
|
|
Overall Study
COMPLETED
|
150
|
150
|
|
Overall Study
NOT COMPLETED
|
0
|
0
|
Reasons for withdrawal
Withdrawal data not reported
Baseline Characteristics
Impact of Adding a Limitation Section in Abstract of Systematic Review
Baseline characteristics by cohort
| Measure |
Abstract With Limitation Section Added
n=150 Participants
we add a limitation section in each selected abstract, the limitation section will focus on the quality of included studies.
interpretation of the abstract of the systematic review
|
Abstract Without Limitation Section
n=150 Participants
We selected 30 abstracts with a conclusion in favour the experimental treatment from a sample of systematic reviews that evaluate the effect of health care intervention.
interpretation of the abstract of the systematic review
|
Total
n=300 Participants
Total of all reporting groups
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Age, Continuous
|
45.2 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.3 • n=99 Participants
|
46.7 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.9 • n=107 Participants
|
46.0 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.7 • n=206 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Female
|
41 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
43 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
84 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Male
|
109 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
107 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
216 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Education qualification
MD
|
78 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
78 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
156 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Education qualification
PhD
|
58 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
64 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
122 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Education qualification
Other
|
14 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
8 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
22 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Clinical experience
<5 years
|
6 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
8 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
14 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Clinical experience
5 to 10 years
|
34 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
28 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
62 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Clinical experience
>10 years
|
110 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
114 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
224 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Reading reports of systematic reviews
Rarely or sometimes
|
61 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
62 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
123 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Reading reports of systematic reviews
Regularly
|
89 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
87 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
176 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
No. of randomized trials involved in
0 trial
|
16 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
11 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
27 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
No. of randomized trials involved in
1-3 trials
|
48 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
48 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
96 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
No. of randomized trials involved in
4-9 trials
|
45 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
54 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
99 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
No. of randomized trials involved in
>10 trials
|
41 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
37 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
78 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Authored at least one systematic review
|
77 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
82 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
159 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
No. of systematic reviews peer-reviewed
0 review
|
75 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
64 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
139 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
No. of systematic reviews peer-reviewed
1-3 reviews
|
55 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
69 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
124 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
No. of systematic reviews peer-reviewed
>3 reviews
|
20 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
16 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
36 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Training in clinical epidemiology
|
101 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
76 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
177 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
|
Training in methods of randomized trials
|
86 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
71 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
157 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 1 monthwe ask participants: "how confident are you in the results of this study?", with the choice of answer based on a 10 points Likert scale (score from 0, not at all confident, to 10, very confident )
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Abstract With Limitation Section Added
n=150 Participants
we add a limitation section in each selected abstract, the limitation section will focus on the quality of included studies.
interpretation of the abstract of the systematic review
|
Abstract Without Limitation Section
n=150 Participants
We selected 30 abstracts with a conclusion in favour the experimental treatment from a sample of systematic reviews that evaluate the effect of health care intervention.
interpretation of the abstract of the systematic review
|
|---|---|---|
|
Confidence in the Results of the Systematic Review
|
4.6 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.5
|
4.4 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.3
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 1 monthWe ask participants: \- "How confident are you in the validity of the conclusions of this study?" with the choice of answer based on a 10 points Likert scale from 0, not at all confident, to 10, very confident
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Abstract With Limitation Section Added
n=150 Participants
we add a limitation section in each selected abstract, the limitation section will focus on the quality of included studies.
interpretation of the abstract of the systematic review
|
Abstract Without Limitation Section
n=150 Participants
We selected 30 abstracts with a conclusion in favour the experimental treatment from a sample of systematic reviews that evaluate the effect of health care intervention.
interpretation of the abstract of the systematic review
|
|---|---|---|
|
Confidence With the Validity of the Conclusions
|
4.1 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.5
|
4.0 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.3
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 1 monthWe ask participants: \- "How confident are you that the intervention "A" could be of benefit to patients?" with the choice of answer based on a 10 points Likert scale from 0, not at all confident, to 10, very confident
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Abstract With Limitation Section Added
n=150 Participants
we add a limitation section in each selected abstract, the limitation section will focus on the quality of included studies.
interpretation of the abstract of the systematic review
|
Abstract Without Limitation Section
n=150 Participants
We selected 30 abstracts with a conclusion in favour the experimental treatment from a sample of systematic reviews that evaluate the effect of health care intervention.
interpretation of the abstract of the systematic review
|
|---|---|---|
|
Beneficial Effect of the Experimental Intervention
|
4.4 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.6
|
4.3 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.3
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 1 monthWe ask participants: "How confident are you that the results of this study could influence your clinical practice?" with the choice of answer based on a 10 points Likert scale from 0, not at all confident, to 10, very confident
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Abstract With Limitation Section Added
n=150 Participants
we add a limitation section in each selected abstract, the limitation section will focus on the quality of included studies.
interpretation of the abstract of the systematic review
|
Abstract Without Limitation Section
n=150 Participants
We selected 30 abstracts with a conclusion in favour the experimental treatment from a sample of systematic reviews that evaluate the effect of health care intervention.
interpretation of the abstract of the systematic review
|
|---|---|---|
|
Influence of Results on Clinical Practice
|
3.8 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.6
|
3.8 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.3
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 1 monthWe ask participants: "Do you think that this systematic review was conducted rigorously?" with the choice of answer based on a 10 points Likert scale from 0, not at all confident, to 10, very confident
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Abstract With Limitation Section Added
n=150 Participants
we add a limitation section in each selected abstract, the limitation section will focus on the quality of included studies.
interpretation of the abstract of the systematic review
|
Abstract Without Limitation Section
n=150 Participants
We selected 30 abstracts with a conclusion in favour the experimental treatment from a sample of systematic reviews that evaluate the effect of health care intervention.
interpretation of the abstract of the systematic review
|
|---|---|---|
|
The Rigor of the Systematic Review
|
4.1 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.7
|
4.4 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.6
|
Adverse Events
Abstract With Limitation Section Added
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Abstract Without Limitation Section
Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths
Serious adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Other adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Additional Information
Isabelle Boutron
Assistance publique hopitaux de paris
Phone: +33 1 42 34 78 33
Email: [email protected]
Results disclosure agreements
- Principal investigator is a sponsor employee
- Publication restrictions are in place