The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Randomized, controlled trials in surgery: Perceived barriers and attitudes of Australian colorectal surgeons
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The objective was to determine the number of randomized controlled trials (RCT) performed by surgeons, published in surgical journals, or comprising a surgical arm and to assess their characteristics and overall quality. METHODS: RCT in general surgery (including gastrointestinal, breast, surgical oncology, vascular, critical care, and trauma) published in 1990 were retrieved by MEDLINE and analyzed to determine the funding agency, type of therapy, area of surgery, journal published, country of origin, number of centers, and whether a surgeon was the principal author. The completeness of the MEDLINE search was compared to a manual search of the literature. All RCT were assessed with Chalmers' qualitative score. RESULTS: MEDLINE retrieved 202 surgical RCT (46% of those retrieved by a manual search) with a mean score of 0.40 +/- 0.13. However, surgical RCT were performed by surgeons in only one third of trials, compared surgical therapies in only one quarter of trials, and were published in surgical journals in less than one third of trials. Only 22% of surgical RCT were funded by peer reviewed granting agencies. The strongest variables determining the quality of surgical RCT were the type of therapy tested (p = 0.0001), the type of journal published (p = 0.006), and the area of general surgery (p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Although surgical RCT are being performed, there are a relatively low proportion and standard of RCT performed by surgeons as the principal author, published in surgical journals, and comparing surgical therapies. This may reflect a lack of expertise by surgeons in clinical trials, lack of funding for surgical trials, methodologic problems peculiar to surgical trials, or a need for adoption of other research designs to assess surgical therapies.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Barriers to Participation in Randomised Controlled Trials
Ross, S., Grant, A., Counsell, C., Gillespie, W., Russell, I., & Prescott, R. (1999) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(99)00141-9 · Cited by 907
Cited by
Meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing open and laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair
Memon, M. A., Cooper, N. J., Memon, B., Memon, M. I., & Abrams, K. R. (2003) · British Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1002/bjs.4301 · Cited by 423
Factors that limit the quality, number and progress of randomised controlled trials
Prescott, Counsell, Gillespie, Grant, Russell, Kiauka, Colthart, Ross, Shepherd, & Russell (1999) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta3200 · Cited by 390
Boutron, I., Tubach, F., Giraudeau, B., & Ravaud, P. (2004) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2003.12.010 · Cited by 300
Should we be performing more randomized controlled trials evaluating surgical operations?
Solomon, M. J., & McLeod, R. S. (1995) · Surgery · doi:10.1016/s0039-6060(05)80359-9 · Cited by 278
Self-citationHandsearching versus electronic searching to identify reports of randomized trials
Hopewell, S., Clarke, M. J., Lefebvre, C., & Scherer, R. W. (2007) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.mr000001.pub2 · Cited by 247
Lefebvre, C., Eisinga, A., McDonald, S., & Paul, N. (2008) · Emerging Themes in Epidemiology · doi:10.1186/1742-7622-5-13 · Cited by 93
A Guide to Planning and Executing a Surgical Randomized Controlled Trial
Chung, K. C., & Burns, P. B. (2008) · The Journal of Hand Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.jhsa.2007.11.027 · Cited by 16
Metadata
- Authors
- Gattellari, M., Ward, J. E., & Solomon, M. J.
- Venue
- Diseases of the Colon & Rectum
- Published
- 2001-10
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1413-1420
- ISSN
- 0012-3706 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2792869253
- Cited by
- 201
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 20.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.