Does the CONSORT checklist for abstracts improve the quality of reports of randomized controlled trials on clinical pathways?

Rationale, aims and objectives The extension of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement provides reporting guidelines to improve the reporting quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This present study was aim to assess the reporting quality of abstracts of RCTs on clinical pathway. Methods Eight databases were searched from inception to November 2012 to identify RCTs. We extracted basic information and CONSORT items from abstracts. Each abstract was assessed independently by two reviewers. Statistical analyses were performed with SPSS 13.0. Level of significance was set at P < 0.05. Results 328 abstracts were included. 300 (91.5%) were published in Chinese, of which 292 were published on high impact factor journals. 28 English abstracts were all published on Science Citation Index (SCI) journals. (1) Intervention, objective and outcome were almost fully reported in all abstracts, while recruitment and funding were never reported. (2) There are nine items (P < 0.05) in Chinese that were of low quality compared with in English. There was statistically difference on total score between Chinese and English abstracts (P < 0.00001). (3) There was no difference in any items between high and low impact factor journal in China. (4) In SCI journals, there were significant changes in reporting for three items trial design (P = 0.026), harms (P = 0.039) and trial registration (P = 0.019) in different periods (pre-and post-CONSORT), but only the numbers of randomized (P = 0.003) changed in Chinese abstracts. Conclusions The reporting quality of abstracts of RCTs on clinical pathway still should be improved. After the publication of CONSORT for abstracts guideline, the RCT abstracts reporting quality were improvement to some extent. The abstracts in Chinese journals showed non-adherence to the CONSORT for abstracts guidelines.