The reporting of methodological factors in randomized controlled trials and the association with a journal policy to promote adherence to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist

被引:124
作者
Devereaux, PJ
Manns, BJ
Ghali, WA
Quan, H
Guyatt, GH
机构
[1] McMaster Univ, Fac Hlth Sci, Dept Med, Hamilton, ON L8N 3Z5, Canada
[2] McMaster Univ, Dept Clin Epidemiol & Biostat, Hamilton, ON L8N 3Z5, Canada
[3] Univ Calgary, Dept Community Hlth Sci, Calgary, AB, Canada
[4] Univ Calgary, Dept Med, Calgary, AB, Canada
来源
CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS | 2002年 / 23卷 / 04期
关键词
randomized controlled trial; CONSORT statement; reporting of methodological factors;
D O I
10.1016/S0197-2456(02)00214-3
中图分类号
R-3 [医学研究方法]; R3 [基础医学];
学科分类号
1001 ;
摘要
The "Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials" (CONSORT) was developed to improve the suboptimal reporting of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, little is known about the quality of reporting since this publication. We undertook an observational study to determine the quality of reporting key methodological factors in RCTs since the publication of the CONSORT statement and if a journal policy to promote adherence to the CONSORT checklist was associated with superior reporting. We recorded the reporting of 11 key methodological factors in 105 RCTs from 29 medical journals published subsequent to the CONSORT statement. We examined the quality of reporting in relation to whether a journal was a "CONSORT promoter" as defined by inclusion of the CONSORT checklist in a journal's "information to authors" section or a requirement that authors, manuscript reviewers, or copy editors complete the CONSORT checklist. Multivariate analysis controlled for journal impact factor, study outcome, and time of publication. Six of the 11 methodological factors were reported <50% of the time. The number of methodological factors reported was greater in CONSORT promoters than in journals not promoting CONSORT in both unadjusted (6.0 and 5.1, respectively, p-value = 0.03) and adjusted (6.4 and 4.8 of the 11 methodological factors, respectively, p-value = 0.0001) analyses. While journals that promote CONSORT demonstrate superior reporting of RCTs, persistent inadequacies in reporting remain. Until these inadequacies are resolved health-care providers will remain limited in their ability to make informed inferences about the validity of the studies upon which they base their clinical practice. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:380 / 388
页数:9
相关论文
共 20 条
[11]  
JADAD A, 1998, RANDOMISED CONTROLLE, P3
[12]   ASCORBIC-ACID FOR COMMON COLD - PROPHYLACTIC AND THERAPEUTIC TRIAL [J].
KARLOWSKI, TR ;
CHALMERS, TC ;
FRENKEL, LD ;
KAPIKIAN, AZ ;
LEWIS, TL ;
LYNCH, JM .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1975, 231 (10) :1038-1042
[13]   The unpredictability paradox: review of empirical comparisons of randomised and non-randomised clinical trials [J].
Kunz, R ;
Oxman, AD .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1998, 317 (7167) :1185-1190
[14]   THE RANDOMIZED CLINICAL-TRIAL - BIAS IN ANALYSIS [J].
MAY, GS ;
DEMETS, DL ;
FRIEDMAN, LM ;
FURBERG, C ;
PASSAMANI, E .
CIRCULATION, 1981, 64 (04) :669-673
[15]   Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? [J].
Moher, D ;
Pham, B ;
Jones, A ;
Cook, DJ ;
Jadad, AR ;
Moher, M ;
Tugwell, P ;
Klassen, TP .
LANCET, 1998, 352 (9128) :609-613
[16]   Use of the CONSORT statement and quality of reports of randomized trials - A comparative before-and-after evaluation [J].
Moher, D ;
Jones, A ;
Lepage, L .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2001, 285 (15) :1992-1995
[17]   The CONSORT statement: Revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials [J].
Moher, D ;
Schulz, KF ;
Altman, DG .
ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2001, 134 (08) :657-662
[18]   INTENTION-TO-TREAT ANALYSIS - IMPLICATIONS FOR QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE RESEARCH [J].
NEWELL, DJ .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1992, 21 (05) :837-841
[19]   ASSESSING THE QUALITY OF RANDOMIZATION FROM REPORTS OF CONTROLLED TRIALS PUBLISHED IN OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY JOURNALS [J].
SCHULZ, KF ;
CHALMERS, I ;
GRIMES, DA ;
ALTMAN, DG .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1994, 272 (02) :125-128
[20]   EMPIRICAL-EVIDENCE OF BIAS - DIMENSIONS OF METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY ASSOCIATED WITH ESTIMATES OF TREATMENT EFFECTS IN CONTROLLED TRIALS [J].
SCHULZ, KF ;
CHALMERS, I ;
HAYES, RJ ;
ALTMAN, DG .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1995, 273 (05) :408-412