| Titre : | Systematic Reviews and Clinical Trials in Rehabilitation: Comprehensive Analyses of Publication Trends (2016) |
| Auteurs : | Tiago S. Jesus |
| Type de document : | Article |
| Dans : | Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (2016/11, 2016) |
| Article en page(s) : | pp. 1853–1862 |
| Langues: | Anglais |
| Descripteurs : |
HE Vinci Essais cliniques comme sujet ; Publications ; Rééducation et réadaptation |
| Mots-clés: | Clinical trials as topic ; Review literature as topic ; Littérature de revue comme sujet |
| Résumé : |
Objective To analyze publication trends of clinical trials (CTs) and systematic reviews (SRs) in rehabilitation. Design PubMed searches were performed with appropriate combinations of Medical Subject Headings. All entries until December 2013, and their yearly distributions since 1981 (when the first rehabilitation SR was identified), were retrieved. After the initial data visualization, data analyses were narrowed to specific periods. Linear regression techniques analyzed the growth of publications and their relative percentages over time. Setting Not applicable. Participants Not applicable. Interventions Not applicable. Main Outcome Measures Not applicable. Results Although not observed for SRs, CTs have grown at a much higher rate in rehabilitation than in the broader health/medical field—more than twice the difference for both periods analyzed (1989–2001, 2001–2013). Rehabilitation journals published about 20% or less of the rehabilitation SRs and CTs, and no significant increases were observed over time (P>.05; 2001–2013). Neurologic conditions, particularly cerebrovascular, were the most addressed by rehabilitation SRs and CTs, while differences between neurologic and other groups of conditions typically widened over time (eg, more than doubled between neurologic and musculoskeletal conditions in 15y). Conclusions While publications of CTs are increasing at a much higher rate within rehabilitation than within broader health care, further research is warranted to explain why this trend is not being followed by SRs, particularly those with meta-analysis. Similarly, research might determine whether the (growing) differences in the publications of rehabilitation SRs and CTs across groups of conditions are justified by clinical or population need. |
| Disponible en ligne : | Oui |
| En ligne : | https://login.ezproxy.vinci.be/login?url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003999316303288 |
Bibliothèques HE Vinci
