Quality of reporting randomised clinical trials in dental and medical research

British Dental Journal

Volumn 192, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 100-103

  Sjogren P ^b   Hailing, A ^a  

^a KRISTIANSTAD UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; DENTAL RESEARCH; DENTISTRY; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; HUMAN; MEDLINE; METHODOLOGY; PUBLICATION; PUBLISHING; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RESEARCH; STANDARD;

DENTAL RESEARCH; HUMANS; MEDLINE; PERIODICALS; PUBLICATION BIAS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS; RESEARCH; RESEARCH DESIGN; RESEARCH SUPPORT; SPECIALTIES, DENTAL;

EID: 0037176688     PISSN: 00070610     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4801304     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Woher D, Jadad AR, Nichol G, Penman M, Tugwell P, Walsh S Assessing the quality of randomised controlled trials: An annotated bibliography of sea les and checklists Control Clin Trials 1995, 16. 62-73
2. Jadad A R Randomised controlled trials. pp 28-36 London BMJ Books, 1998.
3. Sacket D L, Rosenberg W M C, Gray J A M, Haynes R B, Richardsson W S Evidence based medicine what it is and what it isn't. Br Med J 1996, 312: 71-72.
4. Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials: the CONSORT statement J Am Med Assoc 1996, 276: 637-639
5. Altman D G. Better reporting of controlled trials: the CONSORT statement Br Med J 1996, 313: 570-571.
6. Jadad A R, Moore A, Carrol D, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomised clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996, 17. 1-12
7. Linde K, Clausius N, Ramirez G, et al Are the clinical effects of homeopathy placebo effects? A meta-analysis of placebo-controlled trials Lancet 1997; 350: 834-843.
8. Moher D, Pham B, Jones A, et al Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses Lancet 1998, 352: 609-613
9. Khan K S, Daya S, Jadad A R. The importance of quality of primary studies in producing unbiased systematic reviews Arch Intern Med 1996; 156: 661-666.
10. Moher D, Fortin P, Jadad AR, et al Completeness of reporting trials published in languages other than English: implications for conduct and reporting of systematic reviews Lancet 1996, 347: 363-366
11. McQuay H, Carrol D, Jadad A R, Wiffen P, Moore A Anticonvulsant drugs for management of pain: a systematic review. Br Med J 1995, 311 1047-1052.
12. Egger M, Zellweger-Zahner T, Schneider M, Junker C, Lengeler C, Antes G Language bias in randomised controlled trials published in English and German Lancet 1997; 350: 326-329.
13. Antczak A A, Tang J, Chalmers T C Quality assessment of randomised control trials in dental research I Methods J Periodontol Res 1986, 21. 305-314
14. Antczak A A, Tang J, Chalmers T C. Quality assessment of randomised control trials in dental research II Results J Periodontol Res 1986, 21: 315-321
15. Schultz K F, Chalmers A, Haynes R J, Altman D G. Empirical evidence of bias. J Am Med Assoc 1995; 273: 408-412
16. Chalmers T C, Celano P, Sacks H S, Smith H Bias in treatment assignment in controlled clinical trials New Engl J Med 1983; 309. 1358-1361
17. Dickinson K, Bunn F, Wentz R, Ed wards P, Roberts I. Size and quality of randomised controlled trials in head injury review of published studies Br Med J 2000, 320. 1308-1311.
18. Garfield E. Citation analyses as a tool in journal evaluation. Sci 1977; 178: 471-479.
19. Garfield E Significant journals of science. Nature 1976; 264 609-615
20. Cho M K, Bero L A The quality of drug studies published in symposium proceedings Ann Intern Med 1996, 124: 485-489.