A systematic review of trends in the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials in various research fields

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 62, Issue 3, 2009, Pages

  Falagas, Matthew E ^a,b   Grigori, Tatiana ^a   Ioannidou, Eleni ^a  

^a ALFA INSTITUTE OF BIOMEDICAL SCIENCES AIBS   (Greece)

^b TUFTS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Allocation concealment; Blinding; Clinical trials; CONSORT; Dual assessment; Intention to treat

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL STUDY; DATA BASE; DATA EXTRACTION; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; MEDICAL INFORMATION; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDLINE; METHODOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REVIEW; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TREND STUDY;

EID: 58749111982     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.07.012     Document Type: Review

References (46)

1. Donaldson L.J., and Donaldson R.J. Essential public health. 2nd edition. (revised) (2003), Petroc Press
2. www.jameslindlibrary.org accessed July 7, 2006
3. Dias S., McNamee R., and Vail A. Evidence of improving quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials in subfertility. Hum Reprod (2006) (Epub ahead of print)
4. Lai R., Chu R., Fraumeni M., and Thabane L. Quality of randomized controlled trials reporting in the primary treatment of brain tumors. J Clin Oncol 24 (2006) 1136-1144
5. Fernandez-de-las-Penas C., Alonso-Blanco C., San-Roman J., and Miangolarra-Page J.C. Methodological quality of randomized controlled trials of spinal manipulation and mobilization in tension-type headache, migraine, and cervicogenic headache. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 36 (2006) 160-169
6. Koes B.W., Malmivaara A., and van Tulder M.W. Trend in methodological quality of randomised clinical trials in low back pain. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 19 (2005) 529-539
7. Llorca J., Martinez-Sanz F., Prieto-Salceda D., Farinas-Alvarez C., Chinchon M.V., Quinones D., et al. Quality of controlled clinical trials on glaucoma and intraocular high pressure. J Glaucoma 14 (2005) 190-195
8. Strippoli G.F.M., Craig J.C., and Schena F.P. The number, quality, and coverage of randomized controlled trials in nephrology. J Am Soc Nephrol 15 (2004) 411-419
9. Gummesson C., Atroshi I., and Ekdahl C. The quality of reporting and outcome measures in randomized clinical trials related to upper-extremity disorders. J Hand Surg [Am] 29 (2004) 727-734 discussion 735-7
10. Karassa F., Tatsioni A., and Ioannidis J. Design, quality and bias in randomised controlled trials of systemic lupus erythematosus. J Rheumatol 30 (2003) 979-984
11. Quinones D., Llorca J., Dierssen T., and Delgado-Rodriguez M. Quality of published clinical trials on asthma. J Asthma 40 (2003) 709-719
12. Kjaergard L.L., Frederiksen S.L., and Gluud C. Validity of randomised clinical trials in gastroenterology from 1964-2000. Gastroenterology 12 (2002) 1157-1160
13. Ko C.Y., Sack J., Chang J.T., and Fink A. Reporting randomised controlled trials: where quality of reporting may be improved. Dis Colon Rectum 45 (2002) 443-447
14. Hill C., La Valley M.P., and Felson D. Secular changes in the quality of published randomized clinical trials in rheumatology. Arthritis Rheum 46 (2002) 779-784
15. Kyriakidi M., and Ioannidis J. Design and quality considerations for randomised controlled trials in systemic sclerosis. Arthritis Rheum-Arthritis Care Res 47 (2002) 73-81
16. Graf J., Doig G., Cook D., Vincent J.L., and Sibbald J. Randomized controlled clinical trials in sepsis: has methodological quality improved over time?. Crit Care Med 30 (2002) 461-472
17. Bhandari M., Richards R.R., Sprague S., and Schemitsch E.H. The quality of reporting of randomized trials in the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery from 1988 through 2000. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84-A (2002) 388-896
18. Latronico N., Botteri M., Minelli C., Zanotti C., Bertolini G., and Candiani A. Quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials in the intensive care literature. A systematic analysis of papers published in Intensive Care Medicine over 26 years. Intensive Care Med 28 (2002) 1316-1323 (Epub June 13, 2002)
19. Pua H.L., Lerman J., Crawford M.W., and Wright J.G. An evaluation of the quality of clinical trials in anesthesia. Anesthesiology 95 (2001) 1068-1073
20. Friedman D.S., Bass E., Lubomski L., Fleisher L.A., Kempen J.H., Maganizer J., et al. The methodological quality of clinical trials on regional anesthesia for cataract surgery. Ophthalmology 108 (2001) 530-541
21. Sanchez-Thorin J., Corres M., Montenegro M., and Villate N. The quality of reporting of randomized clinical trials published in ophthalmology. Ophthalmology 108 (2001) 410-415
22. Linde K., Jonas W.B., Melchart D., and Willich S. The methodological quality of randomized controlled trials of homeopathy, herbal medicines and acupuncture. Int J Epidemiol 30 (2001) 526-531
23. Kjaergard L., Nikolova D., and Gluud C. Randomised clinical trials in hepatology: predictors of quality. Hepatology 30 (1999) 1134-1138
24. Gluud C., and Nikolva D. Quality assessment of reports on clinical trials in the Journal of Hepatology. J Hepatol 29 (1998) 321-327
25. Thornley B., and Adams C. Content and quality of 2000 controlled trials in schizophrenia over 50 years. Br Med J 317 (1998) 1181-1184
26. Ah-See K.W., and Molony N.C. A qualitative assessment of randomized controlled trials in otolaryngology. J Laryngol Otol 112 (1998) 460-463
27. Bender J.S., Halpern S.H., Thangaroopan M., Jadad A.R., and Ohlsson A. Quality and retrieval of obstetrical anaesthesia randomized controlled trials. Can J Anaesth 44 (1997) 14-18
28. Koes B., Bouter L., and van der Heijden G. Methodological quality of randomized clinical trials on treatment efficacy in low back pain. Spine 20 (1995) 228-235
29. Fahey T., Hyde C., Milne R., and Thorogood M. The type and quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in UK public health journals. J Public Health Med 17 (1995) 469-474
30. Balas E.A., Austin S.M., Ewigman B.G., Brown G.D., and Mitchell J.A. Methods of randomized controlled clinical trials in health services research. Med Care 33 (1995) 687-699
31. Sonis J., and Joines J. The quality of clinical trials published in The Journal of Family Practice, 1974-1991. J Fam Pract 39 (1994) 225-235
32. Solomon M.J., and McLeod R.S. Clinical studies in surgical journals-have we improved?. Dis Colon Rectum 36 (1993) 43-48
33. Anderson J.J., Felson D.T., and Meenan R.F. Secular changes in published clinical trials of second-line agents in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 34 (1991) 1304-1309
34. Emerson J.D., Burdick E., Hoaglin D.C., Mosteller F., and Chalmers T.C. An empirical study of the possible relation of treatment differences to quality scores in controlled randomized clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 11 (1990) 339-352
35. Andrew E., Eide H., Fuglerud P., Hagen E.K., Kristoffersen D.T., Lambrechts M., et al. Publications on clinical trials with X-ray contrast media: differences in quality between journals and decades. Eur J Radiol 10 (1990) 92-97
36. Gotzsche P.C. Methodology and overt and hidden bias in reports of 196 double-blind trials of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs in rheumatoid arthritis. Control Clin Trials 10 (1989) 31-56
37. Liberati A., Himel H.N., and Chalmers T.C. A quality assessment of randomized control trials of primary treatment of breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 4 (1986) 942-951
38. Chalmers T.C., Celano P., Sacks H.S., and Smith Jr. H. Bias in treatment assignment in controlled clinical trials. N Engl J Med 309 (1983) 1358-1361
39. Moher D., Pham B., Jones A., Cook D.J., Jadad A.R., Moher M., et al. Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses?. Lancet 352 (1998) 609-613
40. Schulz K.F., Chalmers I., Hayes R.J., and Altman D.G. Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. J Am Med Assoc 273 (1995) 408-412
41. Moher D., Jones A., Lepage L., and CONSORT Group (Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials). Use of the CONSORT statement and quality of reports of randomized trials: a comparative before-and-after evaluation. J Am Med Assoc 285 (2001) 1992-1995
42. Plint A.C., Moher D., Morrison A., Schulz K., Altman D.G., Hill C., et al. Does the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials? A systematic review. Med J Aust 185 (2006) 263-267
43. Altman D.G. Endorsement of the CONSORT statement by high impact medical journals: survey of instructions for authors. Br Med J 330 (2005) 1056-1057
44. Balasubramanian S.P., Wiener M., Alshameeri Z., Tiruvoipati R., Elbourne D., and Reed M.W. Standards of reporting of randomized controlled trials in general surgery: can we do better?. Ann Surg 244 (2006) 663-667
45. Juni P., Witschi A., Bloch R., and Egger M. The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis. J Am Med Assoc 282 (1999) 1054-1060
46. Herbison P., Hay-Smith J., and Gillespie W.J. Adjustment of meta-analyses on the basis of quality scores should be abandoned. J Clin Epidemiol 59 (2006) 1249-1256 (Epub September 11, 2006)