Improving the quality of abstract reporting for phase I cancer trials

Clinical Cancer Research

Volumn 14, Issue 6, 2008, Pages 1782-1787

  Strevel, Elizabeth L ^a   Chau, Nicole G ^a   Pond, Gregory R ^a   Murgo, Anthony J ^b   Ivy, Percy S ^b   Siu, Lillian L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^b NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER RESEARCH; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MEDICAL EXPERT; PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIAL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUALITY CONTROL; RATING SCALE; SCORING SYSTEM; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE;

ABSTRACTING AND INDEXING AS TOPIC; ADULT; CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE I AS TOPIC; FEMALE; GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASMS; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; PUBLICATION BIAS; PUBLISHING; QUALITY CONTROL; RESEARCH DESIGN; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SOCIETIES, MEDICAL;

EID: 41549100204     PISSN: 10780432     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-07-4886     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Camacho LH, Bacik J, Cheung A, Spriggs DR. Presentation and subsequent publication rates of phase I oncology clinical trials. Cancer 2005;104:1497-504.
2. Stern JM, Simes RJ. Publication bias: evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects. BMJ 1997;315:640-5.
3. Hopewell S, Clarke M, Stewart L, Tierney J. Time to publication for results of clinical trials. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007 April 18;2:MR000011.
4. Scherer RW, Langenberg P, von Elm E. Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007 April 18;2:MR000005.
5. Krzyzanowska MK, Pintilie M, Tannock IF. Factors associated with failure to publish large randomized trials presented at an oncology meeting. JAMA 2003;290:495-501.
6. Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement. JAMA 1996;276:637-9.
7. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman D. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. JAMA 2001;285:1987-91.
8. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials : the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses. Lancet 1999;354:1896-900.
9. Siegel JE, Weinstein MC, Russell LB, Gold MR. Recommendations for reporting cost-effectiveness analyses. Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. JAMA 1996;276:1339-41.
10. Kane RL, Wang J, Garrard J. Reporting in randomized clinical trials improved after adoption of the CONSORT statement. J Clin Epidemiol 2007;60:241-9.
11. Mills EJ, Wu P, Gagnier J, Devereaux PJ. The quality of randomized trial reporting in leading medical journals since the revised CONSORT statement. Contemp Clin Trials 2005;26:480-7.
12. Piggott M, McGee H, Feuer D. Has CONSORT improved the reporting of randomized controlled trials in the palliative care literature? A systematic review. Palliat Med 2004;18:32-8.
13. Moher D, Jones A, Lepage L. Use of the CONSORT statement and quality of reports of randomized trials: a comparative before-and-after evaluation. JAMA 2001;285:1992-5.
14. Hopewell S, Clarke M, Askie L. Reporting of trials presented in conference abstracts needs to be improved. J Clin Epidemiol 2006;59:681-4.
15. Hopewell S, Clarke M. Abstracts presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology conference: how completely are trials reported? Clin Trials 2005;2:265-8.
16. Burns KE, Adhikari NK, Kho M, et al. Abstract reporting in randomized clinical trials of acute lung injury: an audit and assessment of a quality of reporting score. Crit Care Med 2005;33:1937-45.
17. Waxman BP, Dudley HA. A critical assessment of the submitted abstracts for the 1982 Winter Meeting of the Surgical Research society. Br J Surg 1983;70:182.
18. Gourgoulianis K, Panagakis A, Tsakraklides V. Anatomy of the IXth European Congress of Pathology abstracts. Pathol Res Pract1985;180:246-7.
19. Panush RS, Delafuente JC, Connelly CS, et al. Profile of a meeting: how abstracts are written and reviewed. J Rheumatol 1989;16:145-7.
20. Timmer A, Sutherland LR, Hilsden RJ. Development and evaluation of a quality score for abstracts. BMC Med Res Methodol 2003;3:2.
21. Nourbala MH, Einollahi B, Khoddami-Vishte HR, Assari S, Simforoosh N. IX(th) MESOT Congress: quality of the abstracts. Transplant Proc 2007;39:786-7.
22. Krzyzanowska MK, Pintilie M, Brezden-Masley C, Dent R, Tannock IF. Quality of abstracts describing randomized trials in the proceedings of American Society of Clinical Oncology meetings : guidelines for improved reporting. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:1993-9.
23. Scherer RW, Crawley B. Reporting of randomized clinical trial descriptors and use of structured abstracts. JAMA 1998;280:269-72.
24. Moher D, Jadad AR, Tugwell P. Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials. Current issues and future directions. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1996;12:195-208.
25. Parulekar WR, Eisenhauer EA. Novel endpoints and design of early clinical trials. Ann Oncol 2002;13 Suppl 4:139-43.
26. 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;328:22-4.
27. Huwiler-Muntener K, Juni P, Junker C, Egger M. Quality of reporting of randomized trials as a measure of methodologic quality. JAMA 2002;287:2801-4.