Improving the quality of randomized controlled trials in Chinese herbal medicine, part IV: Applying a revised CONSORT checklist to measure reporting quality

Journal of Chinese Integrative Medicine

Volumn 4, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 233-242

  Bian, Zhao Xiang ^a   Moher, David ^b   Dagenais, Simon ^b   Li, You Ping ^c   Wu, Tai Xiang ^c   Liu, Liang ^a   Miao, Jiang Xia ^d   Song, Lisa ^a   Zhang, Hui Min ^a  

^a HONG KONG BAPTIST UNIVERSITY   (Hong Kong)

^b CHILDREN S HOSPITAL OF EASTERN ONTARIO   (Canada)

^c SICHUAN UNIVERSITY   (China)

^d CHINESE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

Chinese herbal medicine; Methodology; Quality assessment; Randomized controlled trial; Reporting

Indexed keywords

CHINESE DRUG; HERBACEOUS AGENT;

CHECKLIST; CHINESE MEDICINE; CLINICAL STUDY; CLINICAL TRIAL; COCHRANE LIBRARY; DRUG FORMULATION; DRUG QUALITY; DRUG SCREENING; DRUG SYNTHESIS; HERBAL MEDICINE; HUMAN; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PUBLICATION; QUALITY CONTROL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RANDOMIZATION; REVIEW; STANDARDIZATION; SYNDROME;

DRUGS, CHINESE HERBAL; HUMANS; MEDICINE, CHINESE TRADITIONAL; PHYTOTHERAPY; QUALITY CONTROL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS;

EID: 33646823745     PISSN: 16721977     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3736/jcim20060303     Document Type: Review

References (20)

1. Bian ZX, Li YP, Moher D, et al. Improving the quality of randomized controlled trials in Chinese herbal medicine, Part I: clinical trial design and methodology. Zhong Xi Yi Jie He Xue Bao, 2006, 4(2): 120-129.
2. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, et al. Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA, 1995, 273(5): 408-412.
3. Egger M, Juni P, Bartlett C, et al. How important are comprehensive literature searches and the assessment of trial quality in systematic reviews? Empirical study. Health Technol Assess, 2003, 7(1): 1-76.
4. Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D, et al. The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med, 2001, 134 (8): 663-694.
5. CONSORT: Strength in science, sound ethics. http://www.consort-statement.org. September 22, 2005.
6. Moher D, Jones A, Lepage L; CONSORT Group. Use of the CONSORT statement and quality of reports of randomized trials: a comparative before-and-after evaluation. JAMA, 2001, 285(15): 1992-1995.
7. Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement. JAMA, 1996,276(8): 637-639.
8. Plint A, Moher D, Altman DG, et al. Does the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomized controlled trials? Oral presentation at the 5th International Congress on Peer Review and Biomedical Communication, Chicago, September 15-18, 2005.
9. Pocock SJ, Hughes MD, Lee RJ. Statistical problems in the reporting of clinical trials. A survey of three medical journals. N Engl J Med, 1987, 317(7): 426-432.
10. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Grimes DA, et al. Assessing the quality of randomization from reports of controlled trials published in obstetrics and gynecology journals. JAMA, 1994, 272(2): 125-128.
11. Olde Rikkert MG, ten Have HA, Hoefnagels WH. Informed consent in biomedical studies on aging: survey of four journals. BMJ, 1996, 313(7065): 1117.
12. Tyson JE, Furzan JA, Reisch JS, et al. An evaluation of the quality of therapeutic studies in perinatal medicine. J Pediatr, 1983, 102(1): 10-13.
13. Altman DG, Dore CJ. Randomisation and baseline comparisons in clinical trials. Lancet, 1990, 335 (8682): 149-153.
14. Liberati A, Himel HN, Chalmers TC. A quality assessment of randomized control trials of primary treatment of breast cancer. J Clin Oncol, 1986, 4(6): 942-951.
15. Gotzsche PC. Methodology and Overt and hidden bias in reports of 196 double-blind trials of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs in rheumatoid arthritis. Control Clin Trials, 1989, 10(1): 31-56.
16. Soares HP, Daniels S, Kumar A, et al. Bad reporting does not mean bad methods for randomised trials: observational study of randomised controlled trials performed by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group. BMJ, 2004, 328(7430): 22-24.
17. DerSimonian R, Charette LJ, McPeek B, et al. Reporting on methods in clinical trials. N Engl J Med, 1982, 306(22): 1332-1337.
18. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. Lancet, 2001, 357(9263): 1191-1194.
19. Sheiner LB. Is intent-to-treat analysis always (ever) enough? Br J Clin Pharmacol, 2002, 54(2): 203-211.
20. Leung K SY, Bian ZX, Moher D, et al. Improving the quality of randomized controlled trials in Chinese herbal medicine, part III: quality control of Chinese herbal medicine used in randomized controlled trials. Zhong Xi Yi Jie He Xue Bao, 2006, 4(3):225-232.