scholarly journals Assessment of reporting quality in randomised controlled clinical trial abstracts of dental implantology published from 2014 to 2016

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. e045372
Author(s):  
Stephanie Knippschild ◽  
Jeremias Loddenkemper ◽  
Sabrina Tulka ◽  
Christine Loddenkemper ◽  
Christine Baulig

ObjectivesAccess to full texts of randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) is often limited, so brief summaries of studies play a pivotal role. In 2008, a checklist was provided to ensure the transparency and completeness of abstracts. The aim of this investigation was to estimate adherence to the reporting guidelines of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) criteria for abstracts (CONSORT-A) in RCT publications.Primary endpointAssessment according to the percentage of compliance with the 16 CONSORT-A criteria per study.Materials and methodsThis study is based on a full survey (212 RCT abstracts in dental implantology, PubMed search, publication period 2014–2016, 45 journals, median impact factor: 2.328). In addition to merely documenting ‘adherence’ to criteria, the authors also assessed the ‘complete implementation’ of the requested information where possible. The collection of data was performed independently by two dentists, and a final consensus was reached. The primary endpoint was evaluated by medians and quartiles. Additionally, a Poisson regression was conducted to detect influencing factors.ResultsA median of 50% (Q1–Q3: 44%–63%) was documented for the 16 criteria listed in the CONSORT-A statement. Nine of the 16 criteria were considered in fewer than 50% of the abstracts. ‘Correct implementation’ was achieved for a median of 43% (Q1–Q3: 31%–50%) of the criteria. An additional application of Poisson regression revealed that the number of words used had a locally significant impact on the number of reported CONSORT criteria for abstracts (incidence rate ratio 1.001, 95% CI 1.001 to 1.002).ConclusionTransparent and complete reporting in abstracts appears problematic. A limited word count seems to result in a reduction in necessary information. As current scientific knowledge is often not readily available in the form of publications, abstracts constitute the primary basis for decision making in clinical practice and research. This is why journals should refrain from limiting the number of words too strictly in order to facilitate comprehensive reporting in abstracts.

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. e032024 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Vassar ◽  
Sam Jellison ◽  
Hannah Wendelbo ◽  
Cole Wayant ◽  
Harrison Gray ◽  
...  

ObjectivesEvaluate the completeness of reporting of addiction randomised controlled trials (RCTs) using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement.SettingNot applicable.ParticipantsRCTs identified using a PubMed search of 15 addiction journals and a 5-year cross-section.Outcome measuresCompleteness of reporting.ResultsOur analysis of 394 addiction RCTs found that the mean number of CONSORT items reported was 19.2 (SD 5.2), out of a possible 31. Twelve items were reported in <50% of RCTs; similarly, 12 items were reported in >75% of RCTs. Journal endorsement of CONSORT was found to improve the number of CONSORT items reported.ConclusionsPoor reporting quality may prohibit readers from critically appraising the methodological quality of addiction trials. We recommend journal endorsement of CONSORT since our study and those previous have shown that CONSORT endorsement improves the quality of reporting.


2009 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 41
Author(s):  
Michalis Efremidis ◽  

There is a sinister synergism between atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF). These common cardiovascular conditions often co-exist and result in significant morbidity and mortality. Despite the extensive amount of research and literature about each of these disorders separately, randomised controlled clinical trial data concerning the management of AF in patients with HF are lacking. The recently published Atrial Fibrillation and Congestive Heart Failure (AF-CHF) trial elucidated the matter of rhythm versus rate control. In addition, non-pharmacological treatment approaches such as catheter ablation of AF and cardiac resynchronisation therapy are rapidly growing and are likely to alter AF management in HF patients in the near future.


Rheumatology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 60 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Helena Marzo-Ortega ◽  
Chiara Perella ◽  
Denis Poddubnyy ◽  
Effie Pournara ◽  
Agnieszka Zielińska ◽  
...  

Abstract Background/Aims  SKIPPAIN (NCT03136861) is the first randomised controlled study involving a biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, with a primary endpoint of spinal pain at Week 8 in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA; ankylosing spondylitis [AS] and non-radiographic [nr]-axSpA). We present the 24-week results of secukinumab in reducing spinal pain and disease activity following step-up dosing. Methods  This double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 3b study enrolled patients (aged ≥18 years) with active disease (BASDAI ≥4; average spinal pain numerical rating scale [NRS] score &gt;4 at baseline; inadequate response to ≥ 2 non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs ≥4 weeks). Patients were randomised (3:1) to subcutaneous secukinumab 150 mg or placebo weekly followed by every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Week 4. At Week 8, placebo patients were re-randomised to secukinumab 150 or 300 mg Q4W. Patients originally randomised to secukinumab 150 mg were classified as responders or non-responders (spinal pain NRS score &lt;4 or ≥ 4, respectively) at Week 8. Responders were re-assigned to continue doubleblind secukinumab 150 mg Q4W (Arm A1). Non-responders were re-randomised to double-blind secukinumab 150 mg (Arm A2) or a step-up dose of 300 mg (Arm A3) Q4W. Treatment was up to Week 24. Primary endpoint: proportion of patients achieving an average spinal pain score &lt;4 on a 0-10 NRS with secukinumab vs placebo at Week 8. Results  380 axSpA patients (269/380 [70.8%] AS; 111/380 [29.2%] nr-axSpA) were randomised to secukinumab 150 mg (N = 285) or placebo (N = 95). The primary endpoint was met (proportion of spinal pain NRS [average] score responders: 32% vs 20%; odds ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.9 [1.1-3.3] favouring secukinumab vs placebo; P &lt; 0.05). Further reductions in spinal pain occurred at Week 24, especially in those initially randomised to placebo and switched to active drug. Pronounced improvements were observed in other disease activity measurements (Table 1). Numerically, more patients achieved ASDAS low disease activity at Week 24 post-secukinumab dose escalation (Arm A3) vs those remaining on the same dose (Arm A2). Conclusion  Secukinumab provided rapid, significant improvement in spinal pain and led to low disease activity in axSpA patients. Secukinumab dose escalation might be beneficial for patients not responding fully to the starting dose. P188 Table 1:Spinal pain and ASDAS-CRP scores at Weeks 8 and 24Week 8SEC 150 mg (N = 285)PBO (N = 95)Change from baseline in spinal pain NRS score (total), mean (SD) [n]-2.6 (2.5) [279]-1.5 (2.2) [92]Change from baseline in ASDAS-CRP score, mean (SD) [n]-1.2 (1.0) [271]-0.5 (0.8) [89]Week 24Active treatment group (SEC treatment starting at baseline)PBO switchers group (SEC treatment starting at Week 8)Arm A1 (SEC 150 R-150) N = 90Arm A2 (SEC 150 NR-150) N = 94Arm A3 (SEC 150 NR-300) N = 94Arm B1 (PBO-SEC 150) N = 45Arm B2 (PBO-SEC 300) N = 44Change from Week 8 in spinal pain NRS score (total), mean (SD) [n]-0.4 (1.5) [88]-2.1 (2.2) [93]-1.9 (2.2) [91]-2.5 (2.6) [45]-2.9 (2.6) [43]Change from baseline in ASDAS-CRP score, mean (SD) [n]-2.2 (1.0) [86]-1.2 (1.0) [93]-1.5 (1.0) [92]-1.5 (1.1) [44]-1.8 (0.9) [43]Arm A1=SEC responder to SEC 150 mg at Week 8 (SEC 150 R-150); Arm A2=SEC non-responder to SEC 150 mg at Week 8 (SEC 150 NR-150); Arm A3=SEC non-responder to SEC 300 mg at Week 8 (SEC 150 NR-300); Arm B1=Placebo patients to SEC 150 mg (PBO-SEC 150); Arm B2=Placebo patients to SEC 300 mg (PBO-SEC 300). ASDAS-CRP, Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score using C-reactive protein; N, total number of patients randomised; n, number of evaluable patients; NR, non-responders; NRS, numerical rating scale; PBO, placebo; R, responders; SD, standard deviation; SEC, secukinumab. Disclosure  H. Marzo-Ortega: Consultancies; AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB. Member of speakers’ bureau; AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda, UCB. Grants/research support; Janssen, Novartis. C. Perella: Corporate appointments; Employee of Novartis. Shareholder/stock ownership; Novartis Stock. D. Poddubnyy: Consultancies; Consultant/speaker for: AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB. Grants/research support; AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer. E. Pournara: Corporate appointments; Employee of Novartis. Shareholder/stock ownership; Novartis Stock. A. Zielińska: Consultancies; Novartis, Pfizer. A. Baranauskaite: Consultancies; AbbVie. Member of speakers’ bureau; Novartis, AbbVie, Amgen, Roche, KRKA. S. Sadhu: Corporate appointments; Employee of Novartis. B. Schulz: Corporate appointments; Employee of Novartis. M. Rissler: Corporate appointments; Employee of Novartis. Shareholder/stock ownership; Novartis Stock.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna-Lotta Irewall ◽  
Anders Ulvenstam ◽  
Anna Graipe ◽  
Joachim Ögren ◽  
Thomas Mooe

AbstractEnhanced follow-up is needed to improve the results of secondary preventive care in patients with established cardiovascular disease. We examined the effect of long-term, nurse-based, secondary preventive follow-up by telephone on the recurrence of cardiovascular events. Open, randomised, controlled trial with two parallel groups. Between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2014, consecutive patients (n = 1890) admitted to hospital due to stroke, transient ischaemic attack (TIA), or acute coronary syndrome (ACS) were included. Participants were randomised (1:1) to nurse-based telephone follow-up (intervention, n = 944) or usual care (control, n = 946) and followed until 31 December 2017. The primary endpoint was a composite of stroke, myocardial infarction, cardiac revascularisation, and cardiovascular death. The individual components of the primary endpoint, TIA, and all-cause mortality were analysed as secondary endpoints. The assessment of outcome events was blinded to study group assignment. After a mean follow-up of 4.5 years, 22.7% (n = 214) of patients in the intervention group and 27.1% (n = 256) in the control group reached the primary composite endpoint (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68–0.97; ARR 4.4%, 95% CI 0.5–8.3). Secondary endpoints did not differ significantly between groups. Nurse-based secondary preventive follow-up by telephone reduced the recurrence of cardiovascular events during long-term follow-up.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document