ABSTRACT
Background: A randomized controlled trial (RCT) is the most valued method for evaluating the drug safety and its efficacy. However, due to incomplete reporting, RCTs may not be a reliable source of information and can lead to false interpretation of outcome. Aim and Objective: The aim of this study was to analyze the completeness in reporting of RCTs published in the Indian medical journals (IMJs) according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2010 checklist items and to analyze, if there was a variation in the completeness between registered and unregistered trials. Materials and Methods: This was a cross-sectional study conducted in the Department of Pharmacology, Bangalore Medical College and Research Institute. The clinical trials published by the IMJs between January 2020 and August 2021 were accessed online, and its full text versions published were downloaded. Completeness in reporting of the RCTs with respect to different CONSORT checklist domains was recorded. The impact of trial registration and CONSORT endorsement on the completeness of reporting RCTs according to CONSORT checklist was determined. Descriptive statistics was used to assess and summarize the data. Results: The overall completeness of reporting was 82.4%, better than the previous years. Major areas of reporting deficiencies were in the title and abstract, result, and registration domains. Registered trials reported better than unregistered. Conclusions: Endorsement of CONSORT in the journal had no difference in reporting. Although the quality of reporting RCTs in the IMJs has improved, it remains unsatisfactory. Completeness of trial reporting could be improvised by strict implementation of CONSORT guidelines.
ABSTRACT
@#Objective To evaluate the quality of reporting of clinical practice guidelines of rehabilitation.Methods A comprehensive retrieve was performed in electronic databases of PubMed, EMBASE, CNKI, China Biology Medicine disc, Wanfang data, etc., from January 1, 2017 to January 11, 2020. Supplementary searches had been done on relevant websites. Two researchers reviewed literatures and assessed the reporting quality independently by using Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT), and any disagreements needed to be discussed in a consensus meeting.Results A total of 16 guidelines were included, with an average reporting rate of (44.8±27.9)%. Among the seven domains of RIGHT, basic information was reported the highest (57.3%), and evidence (31.3%) and other information (31.3%) was the lowest. The reporting rate was less as the guidelines published in China than in foreign contries (OR = 0.80, 95%CI 0.56-1.16), in original version than in update version (OR = 0.79, 95%CI 0.54-1.16); and higher as developed by various societies or associations than developed by non-societies or associations (OR = 1.15, 95%CI 0.82-1.61), however, no statistically significant difference was found in above comparisons.Conclusion Current clinical practice guidelines of rehabilitation reported with low quality. It is proposed that future guideline developers should report guidelines after RIGHT statements, including key information and content, in order to improve the quality of reporting guidelines.
ABSTRACT
Background@#Herbal medicine is a growing and innovative field in Philippine dermatology. There is a need to assess the quality of reporting of published herbal randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in dermatology since these will serve to guide rational development and use of medicinal plants in the Philippines.@*Objective@#The study aimed to assess the quality of reporting of published herbal RCTs in dermatology from the Philippines based on the hCONSORT checklist.@*Methods@#We searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, HERDIN (from inception to 20 September 2018), and other secondary sources for published randomized controlled trials that used any herbal preparation as intervention for the treatment or prevention of a dermatologic disease or for maintenance of healthy skin, hair, or nails. We determined the percentage of reported items based from the hCONSORT checklist. @*Results@#We included 41 trials, majority of which were on infections, infestations, and bites (66%). The three most common families of herbs used were Fabaceae/Leguminosae (22%) (Gliricidia sepium (Jacq.) Walp. [kakawati]; Senna alata (L.) Roxb. / Cassia alata (L.) [akapulko]); Arecaceae (12%) (Cocos nucifera L. [coconut]); and Myrtaceae (12%) (Eucalyptus sp [eucalyptus], Psidium guajava L.[guava], and Melaleuca alternifolia (Maiden & Betche) Cheel [tea tree]). Most of the trials (27/41, 66%) were conducted in accredited dermatology training programs of the Philippine Dermatological Society. Only 11 trials (27%) were published in PubMED-indexed journals. More than half of articles were published after the CONSORT publication in 2006 (59%). The mean percentage of reported hCONSORT checklist items in included studies was 39.6% (SD 9.9), with only seven studies reporting more than 50% of the hCONSORT checklist items.@*Conclusion@#Published herbal RCTs in dermatology from the Philippines are poorly reported based on the hCONSORT checklist. There is a need for dissemination of the hCONSORT to local researchers and journal editors to ensure thorough and quality reporting.
Subject(s)
HerbalABSTRACT
<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To evaluate and compare the reports' qualities of acupuncture randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in China before and after the implementation of two guidelines, i.e., the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement and the Standards for Reporting Interventions in Controlled Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA).</p><p><b>METHODS</b>Proportions of studies that reported CONSORT and STRICTA items were compared for the years before and after implementation of these two guidelines. In addition, the total score of each item's reporting were calculated and reported differences during different date ranges were compared.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>For CONSORT items (maximum score 8), there was evidence of a slight improvement in reporting between 1994-1995 and 1999-2000 combined (2.5±0.6) and 2004-2005 and 2009-2010 combined (3.0±0.9; difference 0.4, 95% confidence interval, 0.3 to 0.6, P<0.01). For STRICTA items (maximum score 17), there was evidence that a slight improvement in reporting between 1994-1995 and 1999-2000 combined (8.6±2.1) and 2004-2005 and 2009-2010 combined (10.1±1.8; difference 1.5, 95% confidence interval, 1.1 to 1.9, P<0.01).</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>Quality of reporting for RCTs of acupuncture treatment conducted in China have generally improved since the introduction of the STRICTA and CONSORT guidelines.</p>
Subject(s)
Humans , China , Guidelines as Topic , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Reference Standards , Research Report , Time FactorsABSTRACT
Background: Biased results from poorly reported trials can mislead decision‑making in health care at all levels, from treatment decisions for the individual patient to formulation of national public health policies. Objective: To evaluate the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in ten Indian dental journals over the period 2011–2012. Materials and Methods: This study included all RCTs published as full‑text articles reported in ten Indian dental journals over the period from 2011 to 2012. The relevant trials were identified by searching Medline. Hand searching of the journals was also carried out by three of the authors to check if any potential trial was missing. Each article was assessed against the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials criteria tool, as described by Schulz et al. (2010). Results: The mean number of criteria present per article was 12.2 (standard deviation [SD] =2.2) and only 5 of 106 articles got total possible score. Most of the articles (69%) did not mention about justification for sample size calculation, 89% of the articles did not mention about allocation concealment, 86% of the articles did not mention about funding and 63% of the articles did not mention about limitations of the study. Conclusion: The quality of reporting of Randomized clinical trials in ten Indian academic journals was poor.
ABSTRACT
To assess the reporting quality of papers published between 2002-2012 in Chilean dental journals. Methods: Bibliometric analysis of research papers published in indexed Chilean dental journals between 2002-2012. Three calibrated examinators (interoperator- Kappa=.83) assessed 205 papers: 150 case-reports, 37 observational studies and 18 clinical trials. Reporting quality was evaluated using CARE for case reports, STROBE for observational studies and CONSORT for clinical trials. Descriptive statistics were conducted. Results: Case-reports reported 35 percent of the required methodological items; epidemiological research reported 16 percent of required items for Materials and Methods and 10 percent for Results. Clinical research reported 29 percent of required Materials and Methods items and 20 percent of Results items. Conclusion: Case-report, epidemiological and clinician research papers in Chilean dental journals published during the 2002 2012 period are lacking explicit key methodological items, preventing a proper research replication or clinical application of the results...
Evaluar la calidad del reporte de estudios descriptivos, clínicos y reportes de casos publicados enrevistas del área odontológicas chilenas en el periodo 2002-2012. Método: Análisis bibliométrico de las publicaciones en revistas dentales chilenas indizadas del 2002 al 2012. Tres evaluadores calibrados (Kappa intraoperadores=.83) evaluaron205 artículos: 150 reportes de casos, 37 estudios observacionales y 18 ensayos clínicos. La calidad del reporte seevaluó utilizando las pautas CARE para reportes de caso, STROBE para estudios observacionales y CONSORT paraensayos clínicos. Resultados: Los porcentajes de cumplimiento para los aspectos metodológicos por diseño fueron de 35 por ciento para los elementos requeridos en el reporte de caso, del 16 por ciento y 29 por ciento para los materiales y métodos de los estudios observacionales y clínicos; y 10 por ciento y 20 por ciento para los resultados de los estudios observacionales y clínicos. Conclusión: Los artículos del tipo reportes de caso, estudios observacionales y clínicos publicados en revistas del área odontológica chilenas en el período 2002-2012 carecen del informe de elementos básicos del diseño y resultados, lo que dificulta su replicabilidad así como su aplicación clínica...
Subject(s)
Humans , Bibliometrics , Dentistry , Periodicals as Topic , ChileABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to analyze the quality of reports on observational studies published in the Korean Journal of Women Health Nursing (KJWHN). METHODS: Forty-six studies using cross-sectional designs published in KJWHN from January 2011 to June 2013 were selected for analysis. Selected articles were reviewed and evaluated by three reviewers using the 22 items of the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement. As some of 22 items had more than one check point, further broken down, 34 checklist items were used for analysis. RESULTS: Overall, the reviewed studies provided sufficient descriptions for many STROBE items. Seven of the 34 items were found to be not applicable, and 15 of the remaining 27 items (55.5%) were evaluated as 'sufficient' in reporting. Only one study included a flow diagram illustrating participation and this lack of flow diagram was the weakest area of reporting in this review. CONCLUSION: Clearer reporting of cross-sectional studies can be attained by attention to vulnerable areas of reporting, such as including a flow diagram of participants, descriptions of sources of bias and reason for non-participation, and describing limitations of the study. Issues regarding the application of STROBE statement items should be actively discussed in order to aid future revision and clarification of items included in STROBE statement.
Subject(s)
Bias , Checklist , Cross-Sectional Studies , Epidemiology , Nursing , Women's HealthABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement was developed to improve the reporting of observational studies. We aimed to evaluate the quality of reporting in cohort studies and case-control studies among observational studies published in the Korean Journal of Family Medicine. METHODS: We searched for cohort studies and case-control studies published as original articles in the Journal of the Korean Academy of Family Medicine during the period January 1992 through December 2009. The main outcome measures were the number and proportion of cohort studies and case-control studies that reported each of 22 checklist items of STROBE. RESULTS: We identified a total of 84 articles, of which 46 articles were cohort studies and 38 were case-control studies. Concerning methods, study designs (10%), bias (13%), study size (0%), statistical methods (12-c and 12-e items, 0%; 12-d item, cohort study, 6%) have been poorly reported. Of results, participants (5-6%), descriptive data (14-b item, 5%), and funding (1%) among other information have been poorly reported. CONCLUSION: The degree of adherence the STROBE recommendations was relatively low in cohort studies and case-control studies published in the Korean Journal of Family Medicine. An effort to improve the reporting of observational studies by application and recommendation of the STROBE statement is required.