We have located links that may give you full text access.
Clinical Trials in Dentistry: A Cross-sectional Analysis of World Health Organization-International Clinical Trial Registry Platform.
INTRODUCTION: Clinical trials are the back bone for evidence-based practice (EBP) and recently EBP has been considered the best source of treatment strategies available. Clinical trial registries serve as databases of clinical trials. As regards to dentistry in specific data on the number of clinical trials and their quality is lacking. Hence, the present study was envisaged.
METHOD: Clinical trials registered in WHO-ICTRP (https://apps.who.int/trialsearch/AdvSearch.aspx) in dental specialties were considered. The details assessed from the collected trials include: Type of sponsors; Health condition; Recruitment status; Study design; randomization, method of randomization and allocation concealment; Single or multi-centric; Retrospective or prospective registration; and Publication status in case of completed studies.
RESULTS: A total of 197 trials were identified. Maximum trials were from United States (n = 30) and United Kingdom (n = 38). Seventy six trials were registered in Clinical Trials.gov, 54 from International Standards of Reporting Clinical Trials, 13 each from Australia and New Zealand Trial Register and Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials, 10 from German Clinical Trial Registry, eight each from Brazilian Clinical Trial Registry and Nederland's Trial Register, seven from Japan Clinical Trial Registry, six from Clinical Trial Registry of India and two from Hong Kong Clinical Trial Registry. A total of 78.7% studies were investigator-initiated and 64% were completed while 3% were terminated. Nearly four-fifths of the registered trials (81.7%) were interventional studies of which randomized were the large majority (94.4%) with 63.2% being open label, 20.4% using single blinding technique and 16.4% were doubled blinded.
CONCLUSION: The number, methodology and the characteristics of clinical trials in dentistry have been noted to be poor especially in terms of being conducted multi-centrically, employing blinding and the method for randomization and allocation concealment. More emphasis has to be laid down on the quality of trials being conducted in order to provide justice in the name of EBP.
METHOD: Clinical trials registered in WHO-ICTRP (https://apps.who.int/trialsearch/AdvSearch.aspx) in dental specialties were considered. The details assessed from the collected trials include: Type of sponsors; Health condition; Recruitment status; Study design; randomization, method of randomization and allocation concealment; Single or multi-centric; Retrospective or prospective registration; and Publication status in case of completed studies.
RESULTS: A total of 197 trials were identified. Maximum trials were from United States (n = 30) and United Kingdom (n = 38). Seventy six trials were registered in Clinical Trials.gov, 54 from International Standards of Reporting Clinical Trials, 13 each from Australia and New Zealand Trial Register and Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials, 10 from German Clinical Trial Registry, eight each from Brazilian Clinical Trial Registry and Nederland's Trial Register, seven from Japan Clinical Trial Registry, six from Clinical Trial Registry of India and two from Hong Kong Clinical Trial Registry. A total of 78.7% studies were investigator-initiated and 64% were completed while 3% were terminated. Nearly four-fifths of the registered trials (81.7%) were interventional studies of which randomized were the large majority (94.4%) with 63.2% being open label, 20.4% using single blinding technique and 16.4% were doubled blinded.
CONCLUSION: The number, methodology and the characteristics of clinical trials in dentistry have been noted to be poor especially in terms of being conducted multi-centrically, employing blinding and the method for randomization and allocation concealment. More emphasis has to be laid down on the quality of trials being conducted in order to provide justice in the name of EBP.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app