Completeness of reporting of trials published in languages other than English: Implications for conduct and reporting of systematic reviews

Lancet

Volumn 347, Issue 8998, 1996, Pages 363-366

  Moher, David ^a   Fortin, Paul ^b   Jadad, Alejandro R ^c   Jüni, Peter ^d   Klassen, Terry ^e   Le Lorier, Jacques ^f   Liberati, Alessandro ^g   Linde, Klaus ^h   Penna, Angelo ^g  

^a OTTAWA HOSPITAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^b MONTREAL GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^c MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^d Clinical Epidemiology Study Group   (Switzerland)

^e UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA   (Canada)

^f UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^g MARIO NEGRI INSTITUTE FOR PHARMACOLOGICAL RESEARCH   (Italy)

^h UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; LANGUAGE; MEDICAL LITERATURE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REVIEW;

EID: 0030023459     PISSN: 01406736     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(96)90538-3     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Chalmers TC, Lau J. Meta-analytic stimulus for changes in clinical trials. Stat Methods Med Res 1993; 2: 161-72.
2. Grégoire G, Derderian F, Le Lorier J. Selecting the language of the publications included in a meta-analysis: is there a tower of Babel bias? J Clin Epidemiol 1995; 48: 159-63.
3. Moher D, Jadad AR, Nichol G, Penman M, Tugwell P, Walsh S. Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: an annotated bibliography of scales and checklists. Control Clin Trials 1995; 16: 62-73.
4. Science Citation Index. SCI journal citation reports: journals ranked by impact factor within category. Philadelphia: Institute for Scientific Information, 1991.
5. Dickersin K, Scherer R, Lefebvre C. Identifying relevant studies for systematic reviews. BMJ 1994; 309: 1286-91.
6. Andrew E, Eide H, Fuglerud P, et al. Publications on clinical trials with x-ray contrast media: differences in quality between journals and decades. Eur J Radiol 1990; 10: 92-97.
7. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trial (in press).
8. Chalmers TC, Celano P, Sacks HS, Smith H. Bias in treatment assignment in controlled clinical trials. N Engl J Med 1983; 309: 1358-61.
9. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 1979; 86: 420-28.
10. Dupont WD, Plummer WD. Power and sample size calculations: a review and computer program. Control Clin Trials 1990; 11: 116-28.
11. Rossetti L, Marchetti I, Orzalesi N, Scorpiglione N, Liberati A. Is proper methodology associated with the use of a clinically relevant outcome measure? The case of randomized clinical trials on medical treatment of open-angle glaucoma. Online J Curr Clin Trials 1993; (Doc No 100).
12. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, Altman DG. Empirical evidence of bias: dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA 1995; 273: 408-12.
13. Ottenbacher K, Difabio RP. Efficacy of spinal manipulation/mobilization therapy: a meta-analysis. Spine 1985; 10: 833-37.
14. Colditz GA, Miller JN, Mosteller F. How study design affects outcomes in comparisons of therapy I: medical. Stat Med 1989; 8: 441-54.
15. Liberati A, Himel HN, Chalmers TC. A quality assessment of randomized control trials of primary treatment of breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1986; 4: 942-51.
16. Chalmers I. The Cochrane Collaboration: preparing, maintaining, and disseminating systematic reviews of the effects of health care. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1993; 703: 156-65.
17. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Grimes DA, Altman DG. Assessing the quality of randomization from reports of controlled trials published in obstetrics and gynecology. JAMA 1994; 272: 125-28.
18. Gøtzsche PC. Methodology and overt and hidden bias in reports of 196 double-blind trials of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in rheumatoid arthritis. Control Clin Trials 1989; 10: 31-56 (correction 1989; 10: 356).
19. Altman DG, Doré CJ. Randomization and baseline comparisons in clinical trials. Lancet 1990; 335: 149-53.
20. The Standards of Reporting Trials Group. A proposal for structured reporting of randomized controlled trials. JAMA 1994; 272: 1926-31.
21. Working Group on Recommendations for Reporting of Clinical Trials in the Biomedical Literature. Call for comments on a proposal to improve reporting of clinical trials in the biomedical literature. Ann Intern Med 1994; 121: 894-95.