MedPath

Impact of Adding a Limitation Section in Abstract of Systematic Review

Not Applicable
Completed
Conditions
Systematic Review
Registration Number
NCT01848782
Lead Sponsor
Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris
Brief Summary

Objective: The investigators aim to evaluate the impact of a adding a " limitations " section in systematic review's abstract on result's interpretation by readers Design: randomized controlled trial with two parallel arms. Participants will be invited to participate in an online survey.

Participants: Eligible participants are corresponding authors of clinical trials published between 2010 and 2012 and referenced in Medline.

Intervention: The investigators will evaluate the impact of the presence of a " limitations " section in abstract of systematic review with meta- analysis. The investigators selected abstracts of meta-analysis from a sample.

Selected abstract will be standardised and the treatment's name hidden. Two groups of abstract will be presented as follow: 1) abstract without " limitations " section 2) abstract with " limitations " section. The " limitations " section will be written by authors and will briefly describe the risk of bias of included studies.

Selected participant are invited by e-mail to answer the survey. After reading one abstract from his/her group of randomisation they are invited to answer 5 questions about their interpretation of the results.

Detailed Description

Not available

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status
COMPLETED
Sex
All
Target Recruitment
300
Inclusion Criteria
  • corresponding authors of clinical trail indexed in pubmed with email address available
Exclusion Criteria

Not provided

Study & Design

Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Design
PARALLEL
Primary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Confidence in the Results of the Systematic Review1 month

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 )

Secondary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
The Rigor of the Systematic Review1 month

We 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

Influence of Results on Clinical Practice1 month

We 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

Confidence With the Validity of the Conclusions1 month

We 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

Beneficial Effect of the Experimental Intervention1 month

We 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

MedPath

Empowering clinical research with data-driven insights and AI-powered tools.

© 2025 MedPath, Inc. All rights reserved.