Reporting quality of randomized-controlled trials in multiple sclerosis from 2000 to 2015, based on CONSORT statement

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 135-139 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dimitrios Rikos ◽  
Efthimios Dardiotis ◽  
Georgios Tsivgoulis ◽  
Elias Zintzaras ◽  
Georgios M. Hadjigeorgiou
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Consort Statement ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled

scholarly journals Evaluation of reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in patients with COVID-19 using the CONSORT statement

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (9) ◽  
pp. e0257093
Author(s):  
Yuhuan Yin ◽  
Fugui Shi ◽  
Yiyin Zhang ◽  
Xiaoli Zhang ◽  
Jianying Ye ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Consort Statement ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Multivariate Linear Regression Analysis ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Adherence Score ◽  
The Consort Statement

Objective To evaluate the reporting quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding patients with COVID-19 and analyse the influence factors. Methods PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library databases were searched to collect RCTs regarding patients with COVID-19. The retrieval time was from the inception to December 1, 2020. The CONSORT 2010 statement was used to evaluate the overall reporting quality of these RCTs. Results 53 RCTs were included. The study showed that the average reporting rate for 37 items in CONSORT checklist was 53.85% with mean overall adherence score of 13.02±3.546 (ranged: 7 to 22). The multivariate linear regression analysis showed the overall adherence score to the CONSORT guideline was associated with journal impact factor (P = 0.006), and endorsement of CONSORT statement (P = 0.014). Conclusion Although many RCTs of COVID-19 have been published in different journals, the overall reporting quality of these articles was suboptimal, it can not provide valid evidence for clinical decision-making and systematic reviews. Therefore, more journals should endorse the CONSORT statement, authors should strictly follow the relevant provisions of the CONSORT guideline when reporting articles. Future RCTs should particularly focus on improvement of detailed reporting in allocation concealment, blinding and estimation of sample size.

scholarly journals Methodological reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in three leading sports medicine journals over 10 years

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qian Chen ◽  
Qirong Zhou ◽  
Sihua Pan ◽  
Xin Zhi ◽  
Xiaoqun Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Sports Medicine ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Consort Statement ◽  
Allocation Concealment ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Scientific Testing

Abstract Background Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard scientific testing for medical interventions. However, low-quality RCTs may provide misleading evidence. This research elucidated the methodological reporting quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in three sports medicine journals over 10 years following the CONSORT statement. Methods and Findings In this study, we evaluated the methodological reporting quality of RCTs in three major sports medicine journals, including Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, British Journal of Sports Medicine and Clinical Journal of Sports Medicine from 2008 to 2017. The methodological reporting quality, including the allocation sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding, type of analysis, handling of dropouts were revealed. Number of patients, funding source, type of intervention and country were retrieved. The methodological reporting quality was descriptively reported. A total of 475 trials were involved and 166 (34.9%) trials reported adequate allocation generation, 124 (26.1%) trials reported adequate allocation concealment, 262(55.2%) trials reported adequate blinding, 122 (25.7%) trials reported type of analysis and 100 (21.1%) trials reported handling of dropouts. Conclusions This study shows that the methodological reporting quality of RCTs in the three major sports medicine journals were unsatisfactory and it can be further improved.

Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials Reporting in the Treatment of Sarcomas

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (9) ◽  
pp. 1204-1209 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maud Toulmonde ◽  
Carine Bellera ◽  
Simone Mathoulin-Pelissier ◽  
Marc Debled ◽  
Binh Bui ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Consort Statement ◽  
Allocation Concealment ◽  
Quality Score ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Intention To Treat ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Oncology Practice

PurposeRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) represent the best evidence in oncology practice. The aim of this study was to assess the reporting quality of sarcoma RCTs and to identify significant predictors of quality.Patients and MethodsTwo investigators searched MEDLINE for pediatric and adult bone and soft tissue sarcoma RCTs published between January 1988 and December 2008. The quality of each report was assessed by using a 15-point overall reporting quality score based on 15 items from the revised Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement (overall quality score [OQS] range, 0 to 15 points). Concealment of allocation, appropriate blinding, and analysis according to intention-to-treat principle were assessed separately because of their crucial methodologic importance by using a 3-point key methodologic index score (MIS; range, 0 to 3).ResultsWe retrieved 72 relevant RCTs that included 16,029 patients. The median OQS was 9.5. Allocation concealment, blinding, and analysis by intent to treat were reported only in 21 (29%), nine (12.5%), and 23 (32%) of the 72 RCTs, respectively. The median MIS was 1 with a minimum of 0 and a maximum of 2. On multivariate analysis, publication after 1996 and high impact factor remained independent and significant predictors of improved OQS. The sole variable associated with improved MIS was the publication of chemotherapy-only trials.ConclusionAlthough the overall quality of sarcoma RCTs reporting has improved over time, reporting of key methodologic issues remains poor. This may lead to biased interpretation of sarcoma trial results.

scholarly journals Reporting quality of randomized, controlled trials evaluating immunotherapy in lung cancer

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jun Du ◽  
Yundi Zhang ◽  
Yiting Dong ◽  
Jianchun Duan ◽  
Hua Bai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Tools to assess the Risk of bias and Reporting Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials in Rehabilitation

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Armijo-Olivo ◽  
Michele Patrini ◽  
Ana Izabela S de Oliveira-Souza ◽  
Liz Dennett ◽  
Chiara Arienti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document