Use of the CONSORT statement and quality of reports of randomized trials

JAMA

Volumn 285, Issue 15, 2001, Pages 1992-1995

  Moher, David ^a,b   Jones, Alison ^b   Lepage, Leah ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^b Thomas C Chalmers Centre for Systematic Reviews   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; EVALUATION; HUMAN; MEDICAL LITERATURE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; QUALITY CONTROL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SCORING SYSTEM;

EID: 0035906286     PISSN: 00987484     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/jama.285.15.1992     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Does quality of reports of randomized trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses?
2. Empirical evidence of bias: Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials
3. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials: The CONSORT statement
4. How to report randomized controlled trials: The CONSORT statement
5. Better reporting of randomized controlled trials: The CONSORT statement
6. Lies, damn lies, and reports of RCTs
7. Does blinding of readers affect the results of meta-analyses?
8. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary?
9. Discussion sections in reports of controlled trials published in general medical journals: Islands in search of continents?
10. The case for structuring the discussion of scientific papers
11. CONSORT and its effect on reports of clinical trials in ophthalmology journals
12. Beyond CONSORT: Need for improved reporting standards for clinical trials
13. Value of flow diagrams in reports of randomized controlled trials