CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials

被引:1011
作者
Moher, David [1 ]
Hopewell, Sally [2 ]
Schulz, Kenneth F. [3 ]
Montori, Victor [4 ]
Gotzsche, Peter C. [5 ]
Devereaux, P. J. [6 ]
Elbourne, Diana [7 ]
Egger, Matthias [8 ]
Altman, Douglas G. [2 ]
机构
[1] Ottawa Hosp, Ottawa Methods Ctr, Clin Epidemiol Program, Ottawa Hosp Res Inst, Ottawa, ON K1H 8L6, Canada
[2] Univ Oxford, Ctr Stat Med, Wolfson Coll, Oxford, England
[3] Family Hlth Int, Res Triangle Pk, NC 27709 USA
[4] Mayo Clin, UK Knowledge & Encounter Res Unit, Rochester, MN USA
[5] Rigshosp, Nord Cochrane Ctr, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark
[6] McMaster Univ, Hlth Sci Ctr, Hamilton, ON, Canada
[7] London Sch Hyg & Trop Med, Med Stat Unit, London WC1, England
[8] Univ Bern, ISPM, CH-3012 Bern, Switzerland
基金
加拿大健康研究院;
关键词
Clinical trials (epidemiology); Epidemiology; Health informatics; Internet; Quantitative research; LOGISTIC-REGRESSION MODELS; ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLES; SAMPLE-SIZE CALCULATIONS; BONE-MINERAL DENSITY; TO-TREAT ANALYSIS; CLINICAL-TRIALS; DOUBLE-BLIND; STATISTICS NOTES; EMPIRICAL-EVIDENCE; STRUCTURED ABSTRACTS;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijsu.2011.10.001
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
100210 [外科学];
摘要
Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and validity of trial findings nor extract information for systematic reviews. Recent methodological analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which are considered the gold standard for evaluating interventions because of their ability to minimise or avoid bias. A group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. It was first published in 1996 and updated in 2001. The statement consists of a checklist and flow diagram that authors can use for reporting an RCT. Many leading medical journals and major international editorial groups have endorsed the CONSORT statement. The statement facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs. During the 2001 CONSORT revision, it became clear that explanation and elaboration of the principles underlying the CONSORT statement would help investigators and others to write or appraise trial reports. A CONSORT explanation and elaboration article was published in 2001 alongside the 2001 version of the CONSORT statement. After an expert meeting in January 2007, the CONSORT statement has been further revised and is published as the CONSORT 2010 Statement. This update improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias. This explanatory and elaboration document-intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the CONSORT statement-has also been extensively revised. It presents the meaning and rationale for each new and updated checklist item providing examples of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies. Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT 2010 Statement, this revised explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated website (www.consort-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomised trials. (C) 2010 Moher et al, reprinted by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of Surgical Associates Ltd. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
引用
收藏
页码:28 / 55
页数:28
相关论文
共 315 条
[1]
How well are randomized controlled trials reported in the dermatology literature? [J].
Adetugbo, K ;
Williams, H .
ARCHIVES OF DERMATOLOGY, 2000, 136 (03) :381-385
[2]
A qualitative assessment of randomized controlled trials in otolaryngology [J].
Ah-See, KW ;
Molony, NC .
JOURNAL OF LARYNGOLOGY AND OTOLOGY, 1998, 112 (05) :460-463
[3]
Selective reporting in clinical trials:: analysis of trial protocols accepted by The Lancet [J].
Al-Marzouki, Sanaa ;
Roberts, Ian ;
Evans, Stephen ;
Marshall, Tom .
LANCET, 2008, 372 (9634) :201-201
[4]
Effect of folic acid and B vitamins on risk of cardiovascular events and total mortality among women at high risk for cardiovascular disease - A randomized trial [J].
Albert, Christine M. ;
Cook, Nancy R. ;
Gaziano, J. Michael ;
Zaharris, Elaine ;
MacFadyen, Jean ;
Danielson, Eleanor ;
Buring, Julie E. ;
Manson, JoAnn E. .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2008, 299 (17) :2027-2036
[5]
Association of funding and conclusions in randomized drug trials - A reflection of treatment effect or adverse events? [J].
Als-Nielsen, B ;
Chen, WD ;
Gluud, C ;
Kjaergard, LL .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2003, 290 (07) :921-928
[6]
Altman D G, 1982, Stat Med, V1, P59, DOI 10.1002/sim.4780010109
[7]
Altman D.G., 2000, Statistics with Confidence: Confidence Intervals and Statistical Guidelines, Vsecond, P6
[8]
Altman D.G., 1998, ENCY BIOSTATISTICS, P1000
[9]
Calculating the number needed to treat for trials where the outcome is time to an event [J].
Altman, DG ;
Andersen, PK .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1999, 319 (7223) :1492-1495
[10]
REVIEW OF SURVIVAL ANALYSES PUBLISHED IN CANCER JOURNALS [J].
ALTMAN, DG ;
DESTAVOLA, BL ;
LOVE, SB ;
STEPNIEWSKA, KA .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 1995, 72 (02) :511-518