Better reporting of randomized trials in biomedical journal and conference abstracts

被引:30
作者
Hopewell, Sally [1 ]
Eisinga, Anne [1 ]
Clarke, Mike [1 ]
机构
[1] UK Cochrane Ctr, Oxford OX2 7LG, England
关键词
randomized controlled trial; methodological quality; structured abstracts; checklists; conference proceedings;
D O I
10.1177/0165551507080415
中图分类号
TP [自动化技术、计算机技术];
学科分类号
0812 ;
摘要
Well reported research published in conference and journal abstracts is important as individuals reading these reports often base their initial assessment of a study based on information reported in the abstract. However, there is growing concern about the reliability and quality of information published in these reports. This article provides an overview of research evidence underpinning the need for better reporting of abstracts reported in conference proceedings and abstracts of journal articles; with a particular focus in the area of health care. Where available we highlight evidence which refers specifically to abstracts reporting randomized trials. We seek to identify current initiatives aimed at improving the reporting of these reports and recommend that an extension of the CONSORT Statement (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials), CONSORT for Abstracts, be developed. This checklist would include a list of essential items to be reported in any conference or journal abstract reporting the results of a randomized trial.
引用
收藏
页码:162 / 173
页数:12
相关论文
共 86 条
[61]   The consistency between scientific papers presented at the orthopaedic trauma association and their subsequent full-text publication [J].
Preston, CF ;
Bhandari, M ;
Fulkerson, E ;
Ginat, D ;
Egol, KA ;
Koval, KJ .
JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC TRAUMA, 2006, 20 (02) :129-133
[62]   Quality of abstracts of papers reporting original cost-effectiveness analyses [J].
Rosen, AB ;
Greenberg, D ;
Stone, PW ;
Olchanski, NV ;
Neumann, PJ .
MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2005, 25 (04) :424-428
[63]   From conference abstract to full paper: differences between data presented in conferences and journals [J].
Rosmarakis, ES ;
Soteriades, ES ;
Vergidis, PI ;
Kasiakou, SK ;
Falagas, ME .
FASEB JOURNAL, 2005, 19 (07) :673-680
[64]   Effect of blinded peer review on abstract acceptance [J].
Ross, JS ;
Gross, CP ;
Desai, MM ;
Hong, YL ;
Grant, AO ;
Daniels, SR ;
Hachinski, VC ;
Gibbons, RJ ;
Gardner, TJ ;
Krumholz, HM .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2006, 295 (14) :1675-1680
[65]   Reviewer agreement trends from four years of electronic submissions of conference abstract [J].
Rowe B.H. ;
Strome T.L. ;
Spooner C. ;
Blitz S. ;
Grafstein E. ;
Worster A. .
BMC Medical Research Methodology, 6 (1)
[66]   Publication rates of scientific papers presented at the Otorhinolaryngological Research Society meetings [J].
Roy, D ;
Sankar, V ;
Hughes, JP ;
Jones, A ;
Fenton, JE .
CLINICAL OTOLARYNGOLOGY, 2001, 26 (03) :253-256
[67]  
SCHERER R, 2006, 14 COCHR C 23 26 OCT, P63
[68]   Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts [J].
Scherer, Roberta W. ;
Meerpohl, Joerg J. ;
Pfeifer, Nadine ;
Schmucker, Christine ;
Schwarzer, Guido ;
von Elm, Erik .
COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2018, (11)
[69]   Reporting of randomized clinical trial descriptors and use of structured abstracts [J].
Scherer, RW ;
Crawley, B .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1998, 280 (03) :269-272
[70]   Ratio measures in leading medical journals: structured review of accessibility of underlying absolute risks [J].
Schwartz, Lisa M. ;
Woloshin, Steven ;
Dvorin, Evan L. ;
Welch, H. Gilbert .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2006, 333 (7581) :1248-1250A