Page 106 - JCTR-11-2

Journal of Clinical and
Translational Research Review of research landscapes and quality

provide suggestions for improvement initiatives or identify strategic planning and resource allocation to strengthen the
an institutional role model that has achieved a certain research ecosystem in Malaysia and Indonesia.
degree of success. In addition, analyzing health conditions
or research areas across different settings and determining Acknowledgments
whether they are over- or under-studied may help guide The authors would like to thank the following colleagues for
future prioritization of research initiatives and resource their helpful suggestions during the protocol development
allocation. Descriptive comparison between countries may stage: Dr. Alfi Yasmina (Lambung Mangkurat University,
also be possible if there are similar studies conducted in Indonesia), Dr. Tan Kit-Aun, Dr. Sanjiv Rampal Lekhraj,
other countries. This provides meaningful benchmarking Dr. Dhashani Sivaratnam, Dr. Maliza Mawardi, Associate
and insights into the effects of evolving historical events in Professor Dr. Cheong Ai Theng, Professor Dr. Lee Ping
clinical and biomedical research activities and quality in Yein, and Professor Dr. Ching Siew Mooi (Universiti Putra
each country. Malaysia, Malaysia).
The research quality tool proposed in this article may
be a useful screening tool for all quantitative study designs, Funding
except qualitative studies, case reports, and systematic None.
reviews. We anticipate that it would be a useful tool for a
quick critical appraisal of research quality. The sequence Conflict of interest
of Relevance-Credibility-Usefulness (acronymized as The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
RECRUS) may enhance efficiency and empower tool users
in the critical appraisal process. The main limitation of this Author contributions
tool would be the reporting quality of the research, including Conceptualization: Boon-How Chew
zero reporting or null publication of any completed study. Investigation: Boon-How Chew, Shaun Wen Huey Lee, Lim
36
In addition, a relatively large number of graduate and Poh Ying, Soo Huat Teoh, Aneesa Abdul Rashid, Navin
postgraduate students’ research projects that were published Kumar Devaraj, Adibah Hanim Ismail, Abdul Hadi
as thesis and not in journals may not be accessible through Abdul Manap, Fadzilah Mohamad, Aaron Fernandez,
37
the tool’s search strategies. Reporting quality is not assessed Hanifatiyah Ali, Puteri Shanaz Jahn Kassim, Nurainul
using the research quality tool proposed in this article, as Hana Shamsuddin,Noraina Muhamad Zakuan, Akiza
specific guides and checklists already exist for this purpose. Roswati Abdullah
While the quality and comprehensiveness of research Writing - original draft: Boon-How Chew, Shaun Wen
reporting may not be as poor as methodological research Huey Lee
quality, they can still affect its assessment. The 10 items Writing - review & editing: Boon-How Chew, Shaun Wen
38
within the three domains of the research quality screening Huey Lee, Lim Poh Ying, Soo Huat Teoh, Aneesa
tool are considered fundamental minimums for most Abdul Rashid, Navin Kumar Devaraj, Adibah Hanim
clinical and biomedical research and are expected to be Ismail, Abdul Hadi Abdul Manap, Fadzilah Mohamad,
available in most published articles. Missing information
in the included articles may be recovered by contacting the Aaron Fernandez, Hanifatiyah Ali, Puteri Shanaz
corresponding authors via email or telephone. Jahn Kassim, Nurainul Hana Shamsuddin,Noraina
Muhamad Zakuan, Indah S. Widyahening
5. Conclusion Ethics approval and consent to participate
This systematic review aims to provide a comprehensive
overview of the clinical and biomedical research landscape in Not applicable.
Malaysia and Indonesia from 1962 to 2019. By systematically Consent for publication
identifying and characterizing research output over this
period, the review will establish a baseline for evaluating Not applicable.
research productivity, methodological rigor, and quality. The Availability of data
findings are expected to highlight both the progress made
and the existing gaps in research, offering critical insights for The protocol proposed in this article has been
researchers, funding bodies, and policymakers. Ultimately, registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020152907; 2020;
this work will serve as a catalyst for future efforts to enhance https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.
research capacity, reduce waste, and promote evidence- php?ID=CRD42020152907) and the Open Science
based practices in the region. Continued monitoring and Framework registry for Research on the Responsible
comparative evaluations over time will further support Conduct of Research (https://osf.io/w85ce).

Volume 11 Issue 2 (2025) 100 doi: 10.36922/jctr.24.00071