首页> 外文期刊>Trials >Assessment of adherence to the CONSORT statement for quality of reports on randomized controlled trial abstracts from four high-impact general medical journals
【24h】

Assessment of adherence to the CONSORT statement for quality of reports on randomized controlled trial abstracts from four high-impact general medical journals

机译:评估是否符合CONSORT声明的质量,该质量来自四种影响较大的普通医学期刊的随机对照试验摘要

获取原文
       

摘要

Background The extended Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement for Abstracts was developed to improve the quality of reports of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) because readers often base their assessment of a trial solely on the abstract. To date, few data exist regarding whether it has achieved this goal. We evaluated the extent of adherence to the CONSORT for statement for quality of reports on RCT abstracts by four high-impact general medical journals. Methods A descriptive analysis of published RCT abstracts in The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), The Lancet, The Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA), and the British Medical Journal (BMJ) in the year 2010 was conducted by two reviewers, independently extracting data from a MEDLINE/PubMed search. Results We identified 271 potential RCT abstracts meeting our inclusion criteria. More than half of the abstracts identified the study as randomized in the title (58.7%; 159/271), reported the specific objective/hypothesis (72.7%; 197/271), described participant eligibility criteria with settings for data collection (60.9%; 165/271), detailed the interventions for both groups (90.8%; 246/271), and clearly defined the primary outcome (94.8%; 257/271). However, the methodological quality domains were inadequately reported: allocation concealment (11.8%; 32/271) and details of blinding (21.0%; 57/271). Reporting the primary outcome results for each group was done in 84.1% (228/271). Almost all of the abstracts reported trial registration (99.3%; 269/271), whereas reports of funding and of harm or side effects from the interventions were found in only 47.6% (129/271) and 42.8% (116/271) of the abstracts, respectively. Conclusions These findings show inconsistencies and non-adherence to the CONSORT for guidelines, especially in the methodological quality domains. Improvements in the quality of RCT reports can be expected by adhering to existing standards and guidelines as expressed by the CONSORT group.
机译:背景技术扩展的摘要合并报告标准声明(CONSORT)是为了提高随机对照试验(RCT)报告的质量而开发的,因为读者通常仅根据摘要来评估试验。迄今为止,关于它是否已实现这一目标的数据很少。我们评估了对CONSORT的遵守程度,以评估4篇影响较大的普通医学期刊对RCT摘要的报告质量。方法由两名审阅者对2010年《新英格兰医学杂志》(NEJM),《柳叶刀》,《美国医学协会杂志》(JAMA)和《英国医学杂志》(BMJ)中已发表的RCT摘要进行描述性分析,从MEDLINE / PubMed搜索中独立提取数据。结果我们确定了271个符合纳入标准的潜在RCT摘要。超过一半的摘要将研究确定为标题随机(58.7%; 159/271),报告了特定的目标/假设(72.7%; 197/271),描述了参加者的资格标准以及数据收集设置(60.9% ; 165/271),详细介绍了两组的干预措施(90.8%; 246/271),并明确定义了主要结局(94.8%; 257/271)。但是,方法学的质量领域报告不足:分配隐藏(11.8%; 32/271)和盲目细节(21.0%; 57/271)。报告每个组的主要结局结果的比例为84.1%(228/271)。几乎所有摘要都报告了试验注册(99.3%; 269/271),而干预措施的资助和危害或副作用报告仅占47.6%(129/271)和42.8%(116/271)。摘要。结论这些发现表明指南存在不一致和不遵守CONSORT的问题,尤其是在方法学质量领域。遵循CONSORT小组表示的现有标准和指南,可以预期会提高RCT报告的质量。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号