Are Japanese randomized controlled trials up to the task? A systematic review.

<h4>Objectives</h4>Despite increasing numbers of RCTs done in Japan, existing international databases fail to capture them, and detailed information on the quality of Japanese RCTs is still missing. This study assessed the characteristics and quality of Japanese RCTs and analyzed factors...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Daisuke Yoneoka, Akinori Hisashige, Erika Ota, Karin Miyamoto, Shuhei Nomura, Miwako Segawa, Stuart Gilmour, Kenji Shibuya
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2014-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/24595104/pdf/?tool=EBI
id doaj-7e8e7c1cb8e44355a5a6deb81ac81b43
record_format Article
spelling doaj-7e8e7c1cb8e44355a5a6deb81ac81b432021-03-04T09:47:07ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032014-01-0193e9012710.1371/journal.pone.0090127Are Japanese randomized controlled trials up to the task? A systematic review.Daisuke YoneokaAkinori HisashigeErika OtaKarin MiyamotoShuhei NomuraMiwako SegawaStuart GilmourKenji Shibuya<h4>Objectives</h4>Despite increasing numbers of RCTs done in Japan, existing international databases fail to capture them, and detailed information on the quality of Japanese RCTs is still missing. This study assessed the characteristics and quality of Japanese RCTs and analyzed factors related to their quality.<h4>Methods</h4>All RCTs conducted in Japan, and published as original articles that assessed the effect of healthcare interventions on humans in 2010, were included. We excluded study protocols, conference abstracts, and comments. In addition, quasi-RCTs were excluded. Data were independently abstracted and assessed by two of the authors and disagreements were resolved by consensus. The quality of Japanese RCTs randomly sampled was assessed using the method guidelines for systematic reviews from the Cochrane Back Review Group. The factors affecting RCT quality were analyzed using a logistic regression model.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 1013 RCTs conducted in Japan were published in 2010. The majority was small-scale (55% of RCTs with sample size less than 50). Eighty percent of RCTs had no information on the funding source and only 8% had been registered before their implementation. RCTs not indexed in international databases were a moderate number (118 RCTs: 37.7% of non-indexed RCTs were of high quality). Surgical intervention studies for external causes of morbidity and mortality with a large sample size, trial registration and a large number of arms were most likely to be of higher quality.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Despite a considerable number of RCTs conducted in Japan, their quality is not satisfactory in some domains. On the other hand, there are high-quality, non-indexed RCTs. The full disclosure of trial information and quality control of clinical trials are urgently needed in Japan.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/24595104/pdf/?tool=EBI
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Daisuke Yoneoka
Akinori Hisashige
Erika Ota
Karin Miyamoto
Shuhei Nomura
Miwako Segawa
Stuart Gilmour
Kenji Shibuya
spellingShingle Daisuke Yoneoka
Akinori Hisashige
Erika Ota
Karin Miyamoto
Shuhei Nomura
Miwako Segawa
Stuart Gilmour
Kenji Shibuya
Are Japanese randomized controlled trials up to the task? A systematic review.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Daisuke Yoneoka
Akinori Hisashige
Erika Ota
Karin Miyamoto
Shuhei Nomura
Miwako Segawa
Stuart Gilmour
Kenji Shibuya
author_sort Daisuke Yoneoka
title Are Japanese randomized controlled trials up to the task? A systematic review.
title_short Are Japanese randomized controlled trials up to the task? A systematic review.
title_full Are Japanese randomized controlled trials up to the task? A systematic review.
title_fullStr Are Japanese randomized controlled trials up to the task? A systematic review.
title_full_unstemmed Are Japanese randomized controlled trials up to the task? A systematic review.
title_sort are japanese randomized controlled trials up to the task? a systematic review.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2014-01-01
description <h4>Objectives</h4>Despite increasing numbers of RCTs done in Japan, existing international databases fail to capture them, and detailed information on the quality of Japanese RCTs is still missing. This study assessed the characteristics and quality of Japanese RCTs and analyzed factors related to their quality.<h4>Methods</h4>All RCTs conducted in Japan, and published as original articles that assessed the effect of healthcare interventions on humans in 2010, were included. We excluded study protocols, conference abstracts, and comments. In addition, quasi-RCTs were excluded. Data were independently abstracted and assessed by two of the authors and disagreements were resolved by consensus. The quality of Japanese RCTs randomly sampled was assessed using the method guidelines for systematic reviews from the Cochrane Back Review Group. The factors affecting RCT quality were analyzed using a logistic regression model.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 1013 RCTs conducted in Japan were published in 2010. The majority was small-scale (55% of RCTs with sample size less than 50). Eighty percent of RCTs had no information on the funding source and only 8% had been registered before their implementation. RCTs not indexed in international databases were a moderate number (118 RCTs: 37.7% of non-indexed RCTs were of high quality). Surgical intervention studies for external causes of morbidity and mortality with a large sample size, trial registration and a large number of arms were most likely to be of higher quality.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Despite a considerable number of RCTs conducted in Japan, their quality is not satisfactory in some domains. On the other hand, there are high-quality, non-indexed RCTs. The full disclosure of trial information and quality control of clinical trials are urgently needed in Japan.
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/24595104/pdf/?tool=EBI
work_keys_str_mv AT daisukeyoneoka arejapaneserandomizedcontrolledtrialsuptothetaskasystematicreview
AT akinorihisashige arejapaneserandomizedcontrolledtrialsuptothetaskasystematicreview
AT erikaota arejapaneserandomizedcontrolledtrialsuptothetaskasystematicreview
AT karinmiyamoto arejapaneserandomizedcontrolledtrialsuptothetaskasystematicreview
AT shuheinomura arejapaneserandomizedcontrolledtrialsuptothetaskasystematicreview
AT miwakosegawa arejapaneserandomizedcontrolledtrialsuptothetaskasystematicreview
AT stuartgilmour arejapaneserandomizedcontrolledtrialsuptothetaskasystematicreview
AT kenjishibuya arejapaneserandomizedcontrolledtrialsuptothetaskasystematicreview
_version_ 1714806955069931520