Social media impact of obstetrical randomized controlled trials published in high impact factor journals

Objective.Well-designed randomized controlled trials (RCT) mitigate bias and confounding, but previous evaluations of rheumatology trials found high rates of methodological flaws. Outside of rheumatoid arthritis, no studies in the modern era have assessed the quality of rheumatology RCT over time or regarding industry funding.Methods.We identified all RCT published in 3 high-impact rheumatology journals from 1998, 2008, and 2018. Quality metrics derived from a modified Jadad scale were analyzed by year of publication and by funding source.Results.Ninety-six publications met inclusion criteria; 82 of these described the primary analysis of an RCT. Over time (1998–2008–2018), trials were less likely to adequately report dropouts and withdrawals (100% vs 82% vs 60%; p < 0.01) or include an active comparator (44% vs 12% vs 13%; p = 0.01). Later trials were more likely to evaluate biologic therapy (11% vs 38% vs 83%; p < 0.01) and report adequate randomization procedures (39% vs 29% vs 60%; p = 0.04). Seventy-nine percent of trials received industry funding. Industry-funded trials were more likely to report double-blinding (86% vs 53%; p < 0.01), patient-reported outcome measures (77% vs 41%; p < 0.01), and intention-to-treat analyses (86% vs 65%; p = 0.04).Conclusion.Industry-funded trials comprise the majority of RCT published in high-impact rheumatology journals and more frequently report metrics associated with RCT quality. RCT assessing active comparators and nonbiologic therapies have become less common in high-impact rheumatology journals.

Download Full-text

Journal impact factor and methodological quality of surgical randomized controlled trials: an empirical study

Langenbeck s Archives of Surgery ◽

10.1007/s00423-017-1593-6 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 402 (7) ◽

pp. 1015-1022 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Usama Ahmed Ali ◽

Beata M. M. Reiber ◽

Joren R. ten Hove ◽

Pieter C. van der Sluis ◽

Hein G. Gooszen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Empirical Study ◽

Impact Factor ◽

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

Journal Impact Factor ◽

Methodological Quality ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Journal Impact

Download Full-text

Eligibility Criteria of Randomized Controlled Trials Published in High-Impact General Medical Journals

JAMA ◽

10.1001/jama.297.11.1233 ◽

2007 ◽

Vol 297 (11) ◽

pp. 1233 ◽

Cited By ~ 540

Author(s):

Harriette G. C. Van Spall ◽

Andrew Toren ◽

Alex Kiss ◽

Robert A. Fowler

Keyword(s):

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

High Impact ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Medical Journals ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

General Medical Journals

Download Full-text

Fruitless Searches

The Phantom Pattern Problem ◽

10.1093/oso/9780198864165.003.0007 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 121-136

Author(s):

Gary Smith ◽

Jay Cordes

Keyword(s):

Social Media ◽

General Population ◽

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

The Internet ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Unlimited Number ◽

The People ◽

Rule Out

The Internet provides a firehose of data that researchers can use to understand and predict people’s behavior. However, unless A/B tests are used, these data are not from randomized controlled trials that allow us to rule out confounding influences. In addition, the people using the Internet in general, and social media in particular, are surely unrepresentative and their activities should be used cautiously for drawing conclusions about the general population. Things we read or see on the Internet are not necessarily true. Things we do on the Internet are not necessarily informative. An unrestrained scrutiny of searches, updates, tweets, hashtags, images, videos, or captions is certain to turn up an essentially unlimited number of phantom patterns that are entirely coincidental, and completely worthless.

Download Full-text

28505 Reporting of subgroup analysis in randomized controlled trials published in the highest impact factor dermatology journals

Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology ◽

10.1016/j.jaad.2021.06.787 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 85 (3) ◽

pp. AB193

Author(s):

Eli Raneses ◽

Meagan M. Simpson ◽

Thomas Barlow

Keyword(s):

Impact Factor ◽

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

Subgroup Analysis ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Randomized Controlled

Download Full-text

A Systematic Review and Analysis of Factors Associated with Methodological Quality in Laparoscopic Randomized Controlled Trials

Digestive Surgery ◽

10.1159/000381886 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 32 (3) ◽

pp. 217-224 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Stavros Athanasios Antoniou ◽

Alexandros Andreou ◽

George Athanasios Antoniou ◽

Antonios Bertsias ◽

Gernot Köhler ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Impact Factor ◽

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

Methodological Quality ◽

Demographic Data ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Factors Associated ◽

Intention To Treat ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Acceptable Quality ◽

Pubmed Search

Several methods for assessment of methodological quality in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been developed during the past few years. Factors associated with quality in laparoscopic surgery have not been defined till date. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between bibliometric and the methodological quality of laparoscopic RCTs. The PubMed search engine was queried to identify RCTs on minimally invasive surgery published in 2012 in the 10 highest impact factor surgery journals and the 5 highest impact factor laparoscopic journals. Eligible studies were blindly assessed by two independent investigators using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) tool for RCTs. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify potential associations with methodological quality. A total of 114 relevant RCTs were identified. More than half of the trials were of high or acceptable quality. Half of the reports provided information on comparative demographic data and only 21% performed intention-to-treat analysis. RCTs with sample size of at least 60 patients presented higher methodological quality (p = 0.025). Upon multiple regression, reporting on preoperative care and the experience level of surgeons were independent factors of quality.

Download Full-text