FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2094143669> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2094143669 endingPage "g5219" @default.
• W2094143669 startingPage "g5219" @default.
• W2094143669 abstract "<b>Objective</b> To examine whether, according to the conclusions of a 2000 systematic review with meta-analysis on interventions to prevent pain from propofol injection that provided a research agenda to guide further research on the topic, subsequently published trials were more often optimally blinded, reported on children, and used the most efficacious intervention as comparator; and to check whether the number of new trials published each year had decreased and whether the designs of trials that cited the review differed from those that did not. <b>Study design</b> Systematic review comparing old trials (published before, and included in, the review) with new trials (published afterwards). <b>Data sources</b> Medline, Cochrane, Embase, and bibliographies to January 2013. <b>Eligibility criteria for study selection</b> Randomised studies testing any intervention to prevent pain from propofol injection in humans. <b>Results</b> 136 new trials (19 778 patients) were retrieved. Compared with the 56 old trials (6264 patients), the proportion of optimally blinded trials had increased from 10.7% to 38.2% (difference 27.5%, 95% confidence interval 16.0% to 39.0%, P<0.001), and the proportion of trials that used the most efficacious intervention as comparator had increased from 12.5% to 27.9% (difference 15.4%, 4.0% to 26.9%, P=0.022). The proportion of paediatric trials had increased from 5.4% to 12.5%, although this was not significant (difference 7.1%, −1.0% to 15.2%, P=0.141). The number of new trials published each year was significantly higher (median number/year 12 (range 7-20) <i>v</i> 2.5 (0-9), P<0.001) with no obvious decreasing trend. 72.8% (n=99) of the new trials cited the review, with their designs similar to trials not citing the review. Only 36.0% (n=49) of the new trials were considered clinically relevant since they used the most efficacious intervention as comparator or included a paediatric population. <b>Conclusions</b> The impact of the systematic review on the design of subsequent research was low. There was an improvement in the reporting of optimal blinding procedures and a tendency towards an increase in the proportion of paediatric trials. The most efficacious intervention was more often chosen as comparator but remained marginally used, and the number of trials published per year had not decreased. The use of systematic reviews should be encouraged to inform rational, and thus ethical, trial design and improve the relevance of new research." @default.
• W2094143669 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2094143669 creator A5033015009 @default.
• W2094143669 creator A5056286765 @default.
• W2094143669 creator A5058096720 @default.
• W2094143669 creator A5091579021 @default.
• W2094143669 date "2014-08-26" @default.
• W2094143669 modified "2023-10-16" @default.
• W2094143669 title "Ability of a meta-analysis to prevent redundant research: systematic review of studies on pain from propofol injection" @default.
• W2094143669 cites W1480729244 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W1599854648 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W1986215651 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W2013003136 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W2024684004 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W2029163232 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W2038693293 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W2048972539 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W2052751862 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W2063407253 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W2072165789 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W2084254640 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W2091849309 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W2095623039 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W2108696783 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W2113235638 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W2122523415 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W2128186353 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W2152186900 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W2153437255 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W2160349094 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W2185261556 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W2320350515 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W2408081177 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W2576440140 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W2588681363 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W2614280718 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W3121245264 @default.
• W2094143669 cites W4236805817 @default.
• W2094143669 doi "https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g5219" @default.
• W2094143669 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/4145062" @default.
• W2094143669 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25161280" @default.
• W2094143669 hasPublicationYear "2014" @default.
• W2094143669 type Work @default.
• W2094143669 sameAs 2094143669 @default.
• W2094143669 citedByCount "40" @default.
• W2094143669 countsByYear W20941436692014 @default.
• W2094143669 countsByYear W20941436692015 @default.
• W2094143669 countsByYear W20941436692016 @default.
• W2094143669 countsByYear W20941436692017 @default.
• W2094143669 countsByYear W20941436692018 @default.
• W2094143669 countsByYear W20941436692019 @default.
• W2094143669 countsByYear W20941436692020 @default.
• W2094143669 countsByYear W20941436692021 @default.
• W2094143669 countsByYear W20941436692022 @default.
• W2094143669 countsByYear W20941436692023 @default.
• W2094143669 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2094143669 hasAuthorship W2094143669A5033015009 @default.
• W2094143669 hasAuthorship W2094143669A5056286765 @default.
• W2094143669 hasAuthorship W2094143669A5058096720 @default.
• W2094143669 hasAuthorship W2094143669A5091579021 @default.
• W2094143669 hasBestOaLocation W20941436691 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConcept C118552586 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConcept C168563851 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConcept C1862650 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConcept C189708586 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConcept C27415008 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConcept C2779473830 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConcept C2780665704 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConcept C44249647 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConcept C535046627 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConcept C95190672 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConceptScore W2094143669C118552586 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConceptScore W2094143669C126322002 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConceptScore W2094143669C168563851 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConceptScore W2094143669C17744445 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConceptScore W2094143669C1862650 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConceptScore W2094143669C189708586 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConceptScore W2094143669C199539241 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConceptScore W2094143669C27415008 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConceptScore W2094143669C2779473830 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConceptScore W2094143669C2780665704 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConceptScore W2094143669C44249647 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConceptScore W2094143669C535046627 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConceptScore W2094143669C71924100 @default.
• W2094143669 hasConceptScore W2094143669C95190672 @default.
• W2094143669 hasIssue "aug26 1" @default.
• W2094143669 hasLocation W20941436691 @default.
• W2094143669 hasLocation W20941436692 @default.
• W2094143669 hasLocation W20941436693 @default.
• W2094143669 hasLocation W20941436694 @default.
• W2094143669 hasLocation W20941436695 @default.
• W2094143669 hasOpenAccess W2094143669 @default.
• W2094143669 hasPrimaryLocation W20941436691 @default.
• W2094143669 hasRelatedWork W2115099528 @default.

• next