Trials (TRIALS)

Publisher: BioMed Central Ltd, BioMed Central

Journal description

Trials is an open access, peer-reviewed, online journal that will encompass all aspects of the performance and findings of randomized controlled trials. Trials will experiment with, and then refine, innovative approaches to improving communication about trials. We are keen to move beyond publishing traditional trial results articles (although these will be included). We believe this represents an exciting opportunity to advance the science and reporting of trials. Prior to 2006, Trials was published as Current Controlled Trials in Cardiovascular Medicine (CCTCVM). All published CCTCVM articles are available via the Trials website and citations to CCTCVM article URLs will continue to be supported. The impact factor shown relates to articles published in CCTCVM during 2003-4. Making all its content open access and not retaining copyright, Trials offers a way to make data both freely available and highly visible to trialists worldwide; this will benefit the impact of your publication among peers and society. The journal has unrestricted space and takes advantage of all the technical possibilities available for electronic publishing. To date, journals have focused on reporting the results of trials, with very little coverage of why and how they are conducted. Reports of trials have been restricted both by authors and editors - both parties often select only a subset of the outcomes measured, while the latter often impose word limits on the articles published making it difficult to communicate the lessons learnt from conducting the trial, let alone include adequate details of how the trial was conducted. The Internet offers both unlimited space and interactivity, and we are keen to harness these attributes. For instance, trialists will be able to provide the detail required to be a true scientific record and do more to make the article's message comprehensible to a variety of reader groups. They will also be able to communicate not only all outcome measures, as well as varying analyses and interpretations, but also in-depth descriptions of what they did and what they learnt. This sharing of direct experience is fundamental to improving the quality and conduct of trials worldwide.

Current impact factor: 2.12

Impact Factor Rankings

2015 Impact Factor Available summer 2015
2013 / 2014 Impact Factor 2.117
2012 Impact Factor 2.206
2011 Impact Factor 2.496
2010 Impact Factor 2.08
2009 Impact Factor 2.02
2008 Impact Factor 1.743
2007 Impact Factor 1.438
2006 Impact Factor

Impact factor over time

Impact factor
Year

Additional details

5-year impact 2.61
Cited half-life 2.90
Immediacy index 0.14
Eigenfactor 0.01
Article influence 1.03
Website Trials website
Other titles Trials journal
ISSN 1745-6215
OCLC 63290284
Material type Document, Periodical, Internet resource
Document type Internet Resource, Computer File, Journal / Magazine / Newspaper

Publisher details

BioMed Central

  • Pre-print
    • Author can archive a pre-print version
  • Post-print
    • Author can archive a post-print version
  • Conditions
    • Publisher's version/PDF may be used
    • Eligible UK authors may deposit in OpenDepot
    • Creative Commons Attribution License
    • Copy of License must accompany any deposit.
    • All titles are open access journals
    • 'BioMed Central' is an imprint of 'Springer Verlag (Germany)'
  • Classification
    ​ green

Publications in this journal

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Knee osteoarthritis is a major cause of disability in the aging population. Based on pathological, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and arthroscopy studies, progressive osteoarthritis involves all tissues of the joint and includes bone marrow lesions, synovial proliferation, fat pad inflammation, and high subchondral bone turnover. Recent research suggests that abnormal perfusion in bone marrow lesions, fat pads, and subchondral bone is associated with pain in knee osteoarthritis, and that dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI is a promising method for studying micro-perfusion alteration in knee osteoarthritis. Traditional Chinese Medicine approaches have been employed for thousands of years to relieve knee osteoarthritis pain. Among herbal medicines, the Jingui external lotion is the preferred and most commonly used method in China to reduce pain in patients with knee osteoarthritis; however, there is a lack of validated evidence for its effectiveness. The purpose of this study is to explore the effectiveness of Jingui external lotion for the management of painful knee osteoarthritis in a short-term study. In addition, we will assess micro-perfusion alteration in the patellar fat pad as well as the femur and tibia subchondral bone via dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. This trial is a randomized, controlled study. A total of 168 patients will be randomized into the following two groups: 1) the Jingui external lotion group (treatment group); and 2) the placebo lotion group (control group). In both groups, lotion fumigation and external washing of the patients' knees will be administered twice a day for 14 consecutive days. Follow-up will be at regular intervals during a 4-week period with a visual analog scale to assess pain, and additional characterization with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Index score; rescue medication will be recorded as the extent and time pattern. In addition, micro-perfusion alteration in the patellar fat pad, femur and tibia subchondral bone will be assessed via dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. This study will provide clinical evidence of the efficacy of Jingui external lotion in treating knee osteoarthritis, and it will be the first randomized controlled trial to investigate micro-perfusion alteration of knee osteoarthritis with Traditional Chinese Medicine external lotion via dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: ChiCTR-TRC-14004727 ; 31 May 2014.
    Trials 12/2015; 16(1):124. DOI:10.1186/s13063-015-0661-x
  • Trials 12/2015; 16(1). DOI:10.1186/s13063-015-0571-y
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) often have more than one primary outcome and frequently have secondary and harm outcomes. Comparison of outcomes between study arms is the primary focus of RCTs, but there are times when the relation between outcomes is important, such as determining whether an intermediate outcome and a clinical outcome have a strong association. We sought to determine how often reports of RCTs depict the relations among outcomes at the individual patient level and, for those studies that use composite outcomes, how often the relations between component elements are depicted. We selected 20 general, specialty and subspecialty medical journals with high impact factors that publish original clinical research. We identified every RCT in the 2011 and 2012 issues and randomly selected 10 articles per journal. For each article we recorded the number of outcomes, the number of composite outcomes and how often the relations between outcomes or elements of composite outcomes were portrayed. All but 16 of the 200 RCTs had more than one outcome. Thus, outcomes could have been related in 92% of studies, but such relations were only reported in 2 (1%). A total of 33 (17%) investigations measured a composite outcome, 32 of which showed data for each component. None, however, showed cross-tabulation of the components. Readers are rarely shown the relation between outcomes. Mandatory posting of datasets or requirements for detailed appendices would allow readers to see these cross-tabulations, helping future investigators know which outcomes are redundant, which provide unique information and which are most responsive to changes in the independent variables. While not every relationship between outcomes requires depiction, at present such information is seldom portrayed.
    Trials 12/2015; 16(1). DOI:10.1186/s13063-015-0584-6