» Articles » PMID: 24595104

Are Japanese Randomized Controlled Trials Up to the Task? A Systematic Review

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2014 Mar 6
PMID 24595104
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: 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.

Methods: 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.

Results: 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.

Conclusion: 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.

Citing Articles

Current Status, Challenges, and Future Perspectives of Real-World Data and Real-World Evidence in Japan.

Hiramatsu K, Barrett A, Miyata Y Drugs Real World Outcomes. 2021; 8(4):459-480.

PMID: 34148219 PMC: 8605941. DOI: 10.1007/s40801-021-00266-3.


Evaluating association between linguistic characteristics of abstracts and risk of bias: Case of Japanese randomized controlled trials.

Yoneoka D, Ota E PLoS One. 2017; 12(3):e0173526.

PMID: 28278271 PMC: 5344454. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0173526.

References
1.
Gluud C, Nikolova D . Likely country of origin in publications on randomised controlled trials and controlled clinical trials during the last 60 years. Trials. 2007; 8:7. PMC: 1808475. DOI: 10.1186/1745-6215-8-7. View

2.
Iglehart J . Prioritizing comparative-effectiveness research--IOM recommendations. N Engl J Med. 2009; 361(4):325-8. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMp0904133. View

3.
Ota E, Tobe-Gai R, Mori R, Farrar D . Antenatal dietary advice and supplementation to increase energy and protein intake. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012; (9):CD000032. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000032.pub2. View

4.
Scott I, Glasziou P . Improving the effectiveness of clinical medicine: the need for better science. Med J Aust. 2012; 196(5):304-8. DOI: 10.5694/mja11.10364. View

5.
Schulz K, Altman D, Moher D . CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Int J Surg. 2011; 9(8):672-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2011.09.004. View