Article type
Year
Abstract
Background:
Increased scope of physiotherapy (PT) practice also has contributed to research in the field of PT. It is essential to determine the production and quality of the clinical trials from India, since it may reflect the scientific growth of the profession. These trends can be taken as a baseline to measure our performance and also can be used as a guideline for future trials.
Objective:
To quantify and analyze qualitatively RCTs from India that are indexed in PubMed and not-indexed in PubMed and to compare the descriptives.
Methods:
Articles were sought in PubMed and PEDro databases using the keywords ’India’, ’Indian’ and ‘physiotherapy’ from 2000 to May 2013. Full texts were retrieved from both databases. Duplicates were removed in PEDro database. Articles identified were analyzed for PEDro score and items, CONSORT items such as randomised controlled trial (RCT) in title, flowchart, statement of primary outcome measure, a priori sample size calculation, reporting of adverse events, registration of protocol and year of publication.
Results and Discussion:
PubMed and PEDro yielded 45 and 96 valid articles respectively that were included for analysis. A priori sample size calculations had been done and reported in 28.9% of the studies indexed in PubMed, but no other studies were found that reported it indexed by databases other than PubMed. The primary outcome measure was explicitly reported by 30.4% of the PubMed studies, but reported in only 2% of studies not indexed by PubMed (Table1). Mean PEDro score of 5.5 (±1.2) and 3.4 (±1.2) were found in PubMed and PEDro (Table-2) and the t-test revealed a statistically significant difference in the means of PEDro scores between two database(P value < 0.005).
Conclusion:
Alhough the quantity of studies found via PubMed is lower than the quantity of studies not indexed by PubMed, the quality of the PubMed indexed studies was found to be better in relation to rigorous methodological design and better reporting.
Keywords: physical therapy, South-East Asia
Increased scope of physiotherapy (PT) practice also has contributed to research in the field of PT. It is essential to determine the production and quality of the clinical trials from India, since it may reflect the scientific growth of the profession. These trends can be taken as a baseline to measure our performance and also can be used as a guideline for future trials.
Objective:
To quantify and analyze qualitatively RCTs from India that are indexed in PubMed and not-indexed in PubMed and to compare the descriptives.
Methods:
Articles were sought in PubMed and PEDro databases using the keywords ’India’, ’Indian’ and ‘physiotherapy’ from 2000 to May 2013. Full texts were retrieved from both databases. Duplicates were removed in PEDro database. Articles identified were analyzed for PEDro score and items, CONSORT items such as randomised controlled trial (RCT) in title, flowchart, statement of primary outcome measure, a priori sample size calculation, reporting of adverse events, registration of protocol and year of publication.
Results and Discussion:
PubMed and PEDro yielded 45 and 96 valid articles respectively that were included for analysis. A priori sample size calculations had been done and reported in 28.9% of the studies indexed in PubMed, but no other studies were found that reported it indexed by databases other than PubMed. The primary outcome measure was explicitly reported by 30.4% of the PubMed studies, but reported in only 2% of studies not indexed by PubMed (Table1). Mean PEDro score of 5.5 (±1.2) and 3.4 (±1.2) were found in PubMed and PEDro (Table-2) and the t-test revealed a statistically significant difference in the means of PEDro scores between two database(P value < 0.005).
Conclusion:
Alhough the quantity of studies found via PubMed is lower than the quantity of studies not indexed by PubMed, the quality of the PubMed indexed studies was found to be better in relation to rigorous methodological design and better reporting.
Keywords: physical therapy, South-East Asia