首页> 外文期刊>Contemporary clinical trials >Improvement in the quality of abstracts in major clinical journals since CONSORT extension for abstracts: A systematic review
【24h】

Improvement in the quality of abstracts in major clinical journals since CONSORT extension for abstracts: A systematic review

机译:自CONSORT扩展摘要以来,主要临床期刊的摘要质量得到了改善:系统的综述

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Background: We sought to determine if the publication of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT). 11CONSORT: Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials. extension for abstracts in 2008 had led to an improvement in reporting abstracts of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).22RCT: Randomized controlled trial. Methods: We searched PubMed for RCTs published in 2007 and 2012 in top-tier general medicine journals. A random selection of 100 trial abstracts was obtained for each year. Data were extracted in duplicate on the adherence to the CONSORT extension for abstracts. The primary outcome was the mean number of items reported and the secondary outcome was the odds of reporting each item. We also estimated incidence rate ratios (IRRs).33IRRs: Incidence rate ratios. Results: Significantly more checklist items were reported in 2012 than in 2007: adjusted mean difference was 2.91 (95% confidence interval [CI]. 44CI: Confidence interval. 2.35, 3.41; p. . 0.001). In 2012 there were significant improvements in reporting the study as randomized in the title, describing the trial design, the participants, and objectives and blinding. In the Results section, trial status and numbers analyzed were also reported better. The IRRs were significantly higher for 2012 (IRR 1.32; 95% CI 1.25, 1.39; p. . 0.001) and in multisite studies compared to single site studies (IRR 1.08; 95% CI 1.03, 1.15; p. = 0.006). Conclusions: There was a significant improvement in the reporting of abstracts of RCTs in 2012 compared to 2007. However, there is still room for improvement as some items remain under-reported.
机译:背景:我们试图确定是否发布《合并报告标准》(CONSORT)。 11CONSORT:合并报告审判标准。 2008年摘要的扩展导致报告随机对照试验(RCT)摘要的情况有所改善。22RCT:随机对照试验。方法:我们在PubMed中搜索了2007年和2012年在顶级普通医学期刊上发表的RCT。每年随机抽取100个试验摘要。遵循CONSORT扩展摘要提取数据一式两份。主要结果是报告的平均项目数,次要结果是报告每个项目的几率。我们还估算了发生率比率(IRR)。33IRR:发生率比率。结果:2012年报告的清单项目比2007年多得多:调整后的平均差异为2.91(95%置信区间[CI]。44CI:置信区间。2.35,3.41; p。<0.001)。 2012年,报告研究的标题随机化,描述了试验设计,参与者,目标和盲法,有了重大改进。在“结果”部分中,报告的试验状态和分析数量也更好。与单地点研究相比(2012年,IRR为1.08; 95%CI为1.03,1.15; p = 0.006),与多地点研究相比,2012年的内部收益率(IRR 1.32; 95%CI 1.25,1.39; p。<0.001)明显更高。结论:与2007年相比,2012年RCT的摘要报告有了显着改善。但是,由于某些项目的报告不足,仍有改进的余地。

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