Checklists to improve the quality of the orthopaedic literature

Indian Journal of Orthopaedics

Volumn 42, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 150-164

  Mundi, Raman ^a   Chaudhry, Harman ^a   Singh, Ishu ^b   Bhandari, Mohit ^a  

^a MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b Millcreek Community Hospital   (United States)

Author keywords

Checklists; Critical appraisal; Diagnostic tests; Meta analysis; Quality assessment; Randomized trials

Indexed keywords

EID: 42549145904     PISSN: 00195413     EISSN: 19983727     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4103/0019-5413.40251     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (35)

1. Tiruvoipati R, Balasubramanian SP, Atturu G, Peek GJ, Elbourne D. Improving the quality of reporting randomized controlled trials in cardiothoracic surgery: The way forward. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2006;132:233-40.
2. Balasubramanian SP, Wiener M, Alshameeri Z, Tiruvoipati R, Elbourne D, Reed MW. Standards of reporting of randomized controlled trials in general surgery: Can we do better? Ann Surg 2006;244:663-7.
3. Agha R, Cooper D, Muir G. The reporting quality of randomised controlled trials in surgery: A systematic review. Int J Surg 2007;5:413-22.
4. Jacquier I, Boutron I, Moher D, Roy C, Ravaud P. The reporting of randomized clinical trials using a surgical intervention is in need of immediate improvement: A systematic review. Ann Surg 2006;244:677-83.
5. Mills E, Wu P, Gagnier J, Heels-Ansdell D, Montori V. An analysis of general medical and specialist journals that endorse CONSORT found that reporting was not enforced consistently. J Clin Epidemiol 2005;58:662-7.
6. Bhandari M, Richards RR, Sprague S, Schemitsch EH. The quality of reporting randomized trials in the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery from 1988 through 2000. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2002;84:388-96.
7. Poolman R, Struijs PA, Krips R, Sierevelt IN, Lutz KH, Bhandari M. Does a "Level I Evidence" rating imply high quality of reporting in orthopaedic randomised controlled trials? BMC Med Res Methodol 2006;6:44-51.
8. Bhandari M, Guyatt GH, Lochner H, Sprague S, Tornetta P 3rd. Application of the consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) in the fracture care literature. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2002;84:485-9.
9. Cowan J, Lozano-Calderon S, Ring D. Quality of prospective controlled randomized trials: Analysis of trials of treatment for lateral epicondylitis as an example. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007;89:1693-9.
10. Devereaux PJ, Manns BJ, Ghali WA, Quan H, Guyatt GH. The reporting of methodological factors in randomized controlled trials and the association with a journal policy to promote adherence to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist. Control Clin Trials 2002;23:380-8.
11. The CONSORT group. CONSORT 2001 checklist and CONSORT 2001 flow diagram. [cited on 2008 Mar 1]. Available from: http://www.consort-statement.org/index. aspx?o=1031.
12. Boutron I, Moher D, Altman DG, Schulz KF, Ravaud P. Extending the CONSORT statement to randomized trials of nonpharmacological treatments: Explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2008;148:205-9.
13. Boutron I, Moher D, Tugwell P, Giraudeau B, Poiraudeau S, Nizard R, et al. A checklist to evaluate a report of a nonpharmacological trial (CLEAR NPT) was developed using consensus. J Clin Epidemiol 2005;58:1233-40.
14. Chan S, Bhandari M. The quality of reporting of orthopaedic randomized trials with use of a checklist for nonpharmacological therapies. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007;89:1970-8.
15. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Lancet 1999;354:1896-900.
16. Audige L, Bhandari M, Griffin D, Middleton P, Reeves BC. Systematic reviews of nonrandomized clinical studies in the orthopaedic literature. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004;427:249-57.
17. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, Olkin I, Williamson GD, Rennie D, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: A proposal for reporting. JAMA 2000;283:2008-12.
18. Petrisor BA, Bhandari M. The hierarchy of evidence: levels and grades of recommendation. Indian J Orthop 2007;41:11-5.
19. Guyatt GH. Therapy and harm: An introduction. In: Guyatt GH, Rennie D, editors. Users' guides to the medical literature: A manual for evidence-based clinical practice/The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. Chicago: AMA Press; 2002. p. 49-53.
20. Levine M, Haslam D, Walter S, Cumming R, Lee H, Haines T, et al. Harm. In: Guyatt GH, Rennie D, editors. Users' guides to the medical literature: A manual for evidence-based clinical practice/The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. Chicago: AMA Press; 2002. p. 81-100.
21. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP. The Strengthening the Report of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies. Ann Intern Med 2007;147:573-7.
22. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, Irwig LM, et al. The STARD statement for reporting studies of diagnostic accuracy: Explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2003;138:W1-12.
23. Furukawa TA, Guyatt GH. Sources of bias in diagnostic accuracy studies and the diagnostic process. CMAJ 2006;174:481-2.
24. Lijmer JG, Mol BW, Heisterkamp S, Bonsel GJ, Prins MH, van der Meulen JH, et al. Empirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests. JAMA 1999;282:1061-6.
25. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, Irwig LM, et al. Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The STARD initiative. Clin Chem 2003;49:1-6.
26. The STARD group. STARD checklist and STARD flow diagram. [cited on 2008 Mar 1]. Available from: http://www.stardstatement.org.
27. Rama S, Boddu KR, Sharmila P, Apsingi S. Quality of reporting of orthopaedic diagnostic accuracy studies is suboptimal. Clin Ortho Rel Res 2006;446:247.
28. The STARD group. Adopters of STARD. [cited on 2008 Mar 1]. Available from: http://www.stard-statement.org.
29. Giacomini M, Cook D, Guyatt GH. Therapy and applying the results: Qualitative research. In: Guyatt GH, Rennie D, editors. Users' guides to the medical literature: a manual for evidence-based clinical practice/The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. Chicago: AMA Press; 2002. p. 433-48.
30. Rich JA, Grey CM. Qualitative research on trauma surgery: getting beyond the numbers. World J Surg 2003;27:957-61.
31. Clark JP, Hudak PL, Hawker GA, Coyte PC, Mohamed NN, Kreder HJ, et al. The moving target: A qualitative study of elderly patients' decision-making regarding total joint replacement surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004;86:1366-74.
32. Poses RM, Isen AM. Qualitative research in medicine and health care. J Gen Intern Med 1998;13:32-8.
33. Poses RM, Isen AM. In defense of qualitative research: responses to Poses and Isen perspective article. J Gen Intern Med 1998;13:64-72.
34. Clark JP. Qualitative research review guidelines: RATS. [cited on 2008 Mar 1]. Available from: http://www.biomedcentral.com/info/ifora/rats.
35. Clark JP. How to peer review a qualitative manuscript. In: Godlee F, Jefferson T, editors. Peer review in health sciences. Second edition. London: BMJ Books; 2003. p. 219-35.