scholarly journals A Cross-sectional literature survey showed the reporting quality of multicentre randomised controlled trials should be improved

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xuan Zhang ◽  
Wai Ching Lam ◽  
Fan Liu ◽  
Mengdan Li ◽  
Lin Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Literature Survey ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Assessment of Reporting Quality in Randomised Controlled Trials of Acupuncture for Post-Stroke Rehabilitation Using the Consort Statement and Stricta Guidelines

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 100-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jingchun Zeng ◽  
Guohua Lin ◽  
Lixia Li ◽  
Liming Lu ◽  
Chuyun Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stroke Rehabilitation ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Consort Statement ◽  
Allocation Concealment ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Quality Of Reporting ◽  
Post Stroke ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Objectives To evaluate the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of acupuncture for post-stroke rehabilitation in order to provide information to facilitate transparent and more complete reporting of acupuncture RCTs in this field. Methods Multiple databases were searched from their inception through September 2015. Quality of reporting for included papers was assessed against a subset of criteria adapted from the Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2010 statement and the Standards for Reporting Interventions in Controlled Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA) guidelines. Each item was scored 1 if it was reported, or 0 if it was not clearly stated. Descriptive statistical analysis was performed. Cohen's κ-statistics were calculated to assess agreement between the two reviewers. Results A total of 87 RCTs were included in the full text. Based on CONSORT, good reporting was evident for items “Randomised’ in the title or abstract’, ‘Participants’, ‘Statistical methods’, ‘Recruitment’, ‘Baseline data’, and ‘Outcomes and estimation’, with positive rates >80%. However, the quality of reporting for the items ‘Trial design’, ‘Outcomes’, ‘Sample size’, ‘Allocation concealment’, ‘Implementation’, ‘Blinding’, ‘Flow chart’, ‘Intent-to-treat analysis’, and ‘Ancillary analyses’ was very poor with positive rates <10%. Based on STRICTA, the items ‘Number of needle insertions per subject per session’, ‘Responses sought’, and ‘Needle type’ had poor reporting with positive rates <50%. Substantial agreement was observed for most items and good agreement was observed for some items. Conclusions The reporting quality of RCTs in acupuncture for post-stroke rehabilitation is unsatisfactory and needs improvement.

scholarly journals Reporting quality of randomised controlled trials published in prosthodontic and implantology journals

2015 ◽  
Vol 42 (12) ◽  
pp. 914-925 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Kloukos ◽  
S. N. Papageorgiou ◽  
I. Doulis ◽  
H. Petridis ◽  
N. Pandis
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomised Controlled

scholarly journals Analysis of conference abstracts of prosthodontic randomised-controlled trials presented at IADR general sessions (2002–2015): a cross-sectional study of the relationship between demographic characteristics, reporting quality and final publication

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. e034635
Author(s):  
Junsheng Chen ◽  
Yubin Cao ◽  
Meijie Wang ◽  
Xueqi Gan ◽  
Chunjie Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Publication Rate ◽  
Demographic Characteristics ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
The Relationship

ObjectivesTo analyse the relationship between demographic characteristics, reporting quality and final publication rate of conference abstracts of prosthodontic randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) presented at International Association for Dental Research (IADR) general sessions (2002–2015).DesignA cross-sectional study on conference abstracts.MethodsConference abstracts of prosthodontic RCTs presented at IADR general sessions (2002–2015) were obtained. Literature search was performed in multiple databases to confirm the final publication status of conference abstracts. Two investigators independently extracted the data including conference date, origin, presentation type, exact p value, number of centres, institution type, overall conclusion, subspecialty, publication time and journal. The reporting quality of abstracts was assessed by two investigators according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement. The relationship between demographic characteristics, reporting quality and final publication was analysed by χ2test.Setting, participants and interventionsNot applicable.Primary and secondary outcome measuresFinal publication rate, demographic characteristics and reporting quality of conference abstracts of prosthodontic RCTs presented at IADR general sessions (2002–2015).ResultsOf the 340 prosthodontic RCT abstracts, 43.24% were published. The mean time to final publication was 22.86 months. Europe contributed the most number of abstracts but Asia and Australia had the highest publication rate. Oral presentation, multicentre trial and complete denture and overdenture subspecialty were associated with a higher publication rate. Reporting quality of eligibility criteria of participants, random assignment and primary outcome results for each group correlated with a higher final publication rate.ConclusionsOver half of conference abstracts of prosthodontic RCTs presented at IADR general sessions (2002–2015) were unpublished. Oral presentation and multiple centres were associated with higher publication rates. Abstracts’ reporting quality addressing participant recruitment, assignment and primary results correlated with trials’ validity and applicability. Conference attendees may refer to this research to identify valid and applicable prosthodontic trials but should treat and apply results cautiously.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document