Abstract reporting in randomized clinical trials of acute lung injury: An audit and assessment of a quality of reporting score

Critical Care Medicine

Volumn 33, Issue 9, 2005, Pages 1937-1945

  Burns, Karen E A ^a,b   Adhikari, Neill K J ^a,c   Kho, Michelle ^a   Meade, Maureen O ^a,d   Patel, Rakesh V ^a,e   Sinuff, Tasnim ^a,f   Cook, Deborah J ^a,f  

^a MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b LONDON HEALTH SCIENCES CENTRE   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^d HAMILTON GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^e UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^f ST JOSEPH S HOSPITAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Acute long injury; Audit; Methodology; Quality of reporting; Randomized controlled clinical trials; Structured abstracts

Indexed keywords

ACUTE LUNG INJURY; ARTICLE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; CLINICAL TRIAL; COCHRANE LIBRARY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; EMBASE; EVALUATION; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEDICAL AUDIT; MEDLINE; META ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLISHING; QUALITY CONTROL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SCORING SYSTEM; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

EID: 24944452436     PISSN: 00903493     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000178361.73895.24     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. A proposal for more informative abstracts: Ad Hoc Working Group for Critical Appraisal of the Medical Literature. Ann Intern Med 1987; 106:598-604
2. Haynes RB, Mulrow CD, Huth EJ, et al: More informative abstracts revisited. Ann Intern Med 1990; 113:69-76
3. Mulrow CD, Thacker SB, Pugh JA: A proposal for more informative abstracts for review articles. Ann Intern Med 1988; 108:613-615
4. Hayward RSA, Wilson MC, Tunis SR, et al: More informative abstracts of articles describing clinical practice guidelines. Ann Intern Med 1993; 118:731-737
5. Naylor CD, Williams JI, Guyatt G: Structured abstracts of proposals for clinical and epidemiological studies. J Clin Epidemiol 1991; 44:731-737
6. Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomeical journals: International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Canadian Med Assoc J 1988; 138:321-326
7. Haynes RB, McKibbon KA, Walker CJ, et al: Online access to MEDLINE in clinical settings: A study of use and usefulness. Ann Intern Med 1990; 112:78-84
8. Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, et al: Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials: The CONSORT statement. JAMA 1996; 276:637-639
9. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG: The CONSORT statement: Revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. CONSORT GROUP (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials). Ann Intern Med 2001; 134:657-662
10. Robinson KA, Dickersin K: Development of a highly sensitive search strategy for the retrieval of reports of controlled trials using PubMed. Int J Epidemiol 2002; 31:150-153
11. DerSimonian R, Charette LJ, McPeek B, et al: Reporting on methods in clinical trials. N Engl J Med 1982; 306:1332-1337
12. Narine L, Yee DS, Einarson TR, et al: Quality of abstracts of original research articles in CMAJ in 1989. Can Med Assoc J 1991; 144:449-453
13. Taddio A, Pain T, Fassos FF, et al: Quality of unstructured and structured abstracts of original articles in the British Medical Journal, Canadian Medical Association Journal and Journal of the American Medical Association. Can Med Assoc J 1994; 150:1611-1615
14. Norman J, Streiner DL: Biostatistics: The Bare Essentials. Second Edition. Hamilton, BC Decker, 2000, p 71
15. Fleiss JL: Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. Second Edition. New York, J Wiley and Sons, 1981, pp 212-236
16. Cosentino F, Paganini E, Lockrem J, et al: Continuous arteriovenous hemofiltration in the adult respiratory distress syndrome: A randomized trial. Contrib Nephrol 1991; 93:94-97
17. Trakas K, Addis A, Kruk D, et al: Quality assessment of pharmacoeconomic abstracts of original research articles in selected journals. Pharmacoeconomics 1997; 31:423-428
18. Bhandari M, Devereaux PJ, Guyatt G, et al: An observational study of orthopaedic abstracts and subsequent full-text publications. J Bone Joint Surg 2002; 84:615-621
19. Justice AC, Cho MK, Winker MA, et al: Does masking author identity improve peer review quality? JAMA 1998; 280:240-242
20. McNutt RA, Evans AT, Fletcher RH, et al: The effects of blinding on the quality of peer review: A randomized trial. JAMA 1990; 263:1371-1376
21. Fisher M, Friedman SB, Strauss B: The effects of blinding on acceptance of research papers by peer review. JAMA 1994; 272:143-146
22. Smith J Jr, Nixon R, Bueschen AJ, et al: Impact of blinded versus unblinded abstract review on scientific program content. J Urol 2002; 168:2123-2125
23. Godlee F, Gale CR, Martyn CN: Effect on the quality of peer review of blinding reviewers and asking them to sign their reports. JAMA 1998; 280:237-240
24. van Rooyen S, Godlee F, Evans S, et al: Effect of blinding and unmasking on the quality of peer review: A randomized trial. JAMA 1998; 280:234-237
25. Krzyzanowska MK, Pintilie M, Brezden-Masley C, et al: Quality of abstracts describing randomized trials in the proceeding of the American Society of Clinical Oncology meetings: Guidelines for improved reporting, J Clin Oncol 2004; 22:1993-1999
26. Evans M, Pollock AV: Trials on trial: A review of trials of antibiotic prophylaxis. Arch Surg, 1984; 119:109-113
27. Pocock SJ, Hughes MD, Lee RJ: Statistical problems in the reporting of clinical trials: P survey of three medical journals. N Engl J Med 1987; 317:4260-4232
28. Gotzsche 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
29. Pitkin RM, Branagan MA, Burmeister LF: Accuracy of data in abstracts of published research articles. JAMA 1999; 281 1110-1111
30. Comans ML, Overbeke AJ: The structured summary: A tool for reader and author. Ned. Tijdschr Geneeskd 1990; 134:2338-2343
31. Froom P, Froom J: Deficiencies in structured medical abstracts. J Clin Epidemiol 1993 46:591-594