Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 22, 2026
08:36
The Adjuvant Efficacy of Angong Niuhuang Pill in the Treatment of Viral Encephalitis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Published on: April 19, 2024
Randomized trials published in Chinese or Western journals: comparative empirical analysis
Marianna Purgato1, Andrea Cipriani, Corrado Barbui
1Section of Psychiatry, Department of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of Verona, Verona, Italy. marianna.purgato@univr.it
Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology
|May 1, 2012
Summary
Systematic reviews including Chinese randomized trials must assess reporting quality. While both Chinese and Western studies showed poor reporting, omitting Chinese research risks bias. Citalopram
Area of Science:
- Pharmacopsychiatry
- Clinical Trials Methodology
- Evidence-Based Medicine
Background:
- Systematic reviews face challenges with study reporting quality from Chinese journals.
- Comparing randomized trials from Chinese and Western publications is crucial for comprehensive reviews.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the characteristics and reporting quality of randomized trials published in Chinese versus Western journals.
- To assess the impact of including Chinese studies on systematic reviews of antidepressant efficacy.
Main Methods:
- Systematic survey of 69 randomized controlled trials comparing citalopram with other antidepressants for major depression.
- Analysis of reporting standards, including randomization, allocation concealment, blinding, and sponsorship bias, for both Chinese and Western publications.
Main Results:
- Poor reporting standards were observed in both Chinese and Western studies.
- Chinese studies showed particular concerns regarding randomization sequence generation and allocation concealment; blinding was seldom used.
- Western studies frequently exhibited selective and incomplete outcome reporting; financial support was often not disclosed in Chinese studies.
- Citalopram demonstrated similar efficacy across both groups of studies (Western SMD: -0.04; Chinese SMD: -0.08).
Conclusions:
- Randomized controlled trials from Chinese journals constitute a significant portion of published research.
- Excluding Chinese biomedical databases risks systematic exclusion of relevant trials, introducing potential bias or random error.
- Enhanced scrutiny of randomized trial quality is essential when incorporating Chinese studies into meta-analyses.
Related Concept Videos
01:20Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Completely Randomized and Randomized Block Designs
Bioequivalence experimental study designs are crucial methodologies used in evaluating and comparing the bioavailability of different drug products. These designs are categorized into various types: completely randomized, randomized block, repeated measures, cross and carry-over, and Latin square designs.Completely randomized designs involve randomly allocating treatments to all subjects participating in the experiment. This allocation is achieved by assigning unique random numbers to subjects...
01:13Randomized Experiments
The randomization process involves assigning study participants randomly to experimental or control groups based on their probability of being equally assigned. Randomization is meant to eliminate selection bias and balance known and unknown confounding factors so that the control group is similar to the treatment group as much as possible. A computer program and a random number generator can be used to assign participants to groups in a way that minimizes bias.
Simple randomization
Simple...
Simple randomization
Simple...
01:12Hazard Ratio
The hazard ratio (HR) is a widely used measure in clinical trials to compare the risk of events, such as death or disease recurrence, between two groups over time. It reflects the ratio of hazard rates—the instantaneous risk of the event occurring—between a treatment group and a control group. This measure provides valuable insights into the relative effectiveness of a treatment by assessing how the risk of an event differs between the two groups.
For example, in a clinical trial evaluating a...
For example, in a clinical trial evaluating a...
02:01Group Design
The most basic experimental design involves two groups: the experimental group and the control group. The two groups are designed to be the same except for one difference— experimental manipulation. The experimental group gets the experimental manipulation—that is, the treatment or variable being tested—and the control group does not. Since experimental manipulation is the only difference between the experimental and control groups, we can be sure that any differences between the two are due to...
01:15Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Repeated Measures, Cross-Over, Carry-Over, and Latin Square Designs
Bioequivalence experimental study designs play a pivotal role in testing the effectiveness of various treatments. Key among these are the repeated measures, cross-over, carry-over, and Latin square designs. In the repeated measures design, each subject receives all treatments, allowing for temporal comparisons. This type of design is useful in reducing variability but requires careful planning to avoid bias.The cross-over design, an economical method, involves sequential administration of...
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Biopharmaceutical studies constitute a vital field aiming to enhance drug delivery methods and refine therapeutic approaches, drawing upon diverse interdisciplinary knowledge. In research methodologies, the choice between controlled and non-controlled studies significantly influences the study's reliability and accuracy.
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...