CONSORT adoption and quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials: A systematic analysis in two dermatology journals

British Journal of Dermatology

Volumn 161, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 1159-1165

  Alvarez, F ^a   Meyer, N ^a   Gourraud, P A ^a   Paul, C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE TOULOUSE   (France)

Author keywords

CONSORT statement; Methodological quality; Randomized controlled trials

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DRUG INDUSTRY; FUNDING; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDLINE; METHODOLOGY; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SCORING SYSTEM; STANDARDIZATION; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

DERMATOLOGY; GREAT BRITAIN; GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; UNITED STATES;

EID: 71949106144     PISSN: 00070963     EISSN: 13652133     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2009.09382.x     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Barzilai DA, Freiman A, Dellavalle RP et al. Dermato-epidemiology. J Am Acad Dermatol 2005 52 : 559 573.
2. Bigby M, Gadenne AS. Understanding and evaluating clinical trials. J Am Acad Dermatol 1996 34 : 555 563.
3. Adetugbo K, Williams H. How well are randomized controlled trials reported in the dermatology literature? Arch Dermatol 2000 136 : 381 385.
4. Chalmers TC, Smith H, Blackburn B et al. A method for assessing the quality of a randomized control trial. Control Clin Trials 1981 2 : 31 49.
5. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Caroll D et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996 17 : 1 12.
6. Moher D, Pham B, Jones A et al. Does quality of reports of randomized trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? Lancet 1999 352 : 609 613.
7. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, Altman DG. Empirical evidence of bias: dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA 1995 273 : 408 412.
8. The Standards of Reporting Trials Group. A proposal for structured reporting of randomized controlled trials. JAMA 1994 272 : 1926 1931.
9. 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.
10. Rennie D. How to report randomized controlled trials: the CONSORT statement. JAMA 1996 276 : 649.
11. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG, for the CONSORT Group. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. Lancet 2001 357 : 1191 1194. (Pubitemid 32378696)
12. Weinstock MA. The JAAD adopts the CONSORT statement. J Am Acad Dermatol 1999 41 : 1045 1047.
13. Cox NH, Williams HC. Can you COPE with CONSORT? Br J Dermatol 2000 142 : 1 3.
14. Williams HC, Goldsmith L. The JID opens its doors to high-quality randomized controlled clinical trials. J Invest Dermatol 2006 126 : 1683 1684.
15. Williams HC, Seed P. Inadequate size of 'negative' clinical trials in dermatology. Br J Dermatol 1993 128 : 317 326.
16. Alam M, Barzilai DA, Wrone DA. Power and sample size of therapeutic trials in procedural dermatology: how many patients are enough? Dermatol Surg 2005 31 : 201 205.
17. Ferraris VA, Ferraris SP. Assessing the medical literature: let the buyer beware. Ann Thorac Surg 2003 76 : 4 11.
18. Bigby M, Stern RS, Bigby JA. An evaluation of method reporting and use in clinical trials in dermatology. Arch Dermatol 1985 121 : 1394 1399.
19. Moher D, Jones A, Lepage L et al. Use of the CONSORT statement and quality of reports of randomized trials. A comparative before-and-after evaluation. JAMA 2001 285 : 1992 1995.
20. Mills E, Wu P, Gagnier J et al. The quality of randomized trial reporting in leading medical journals since the revised CONSORT statement. Contemp Clin Trials 2005 26 : 480 487.
21. Plint AC, Moher D, Morrison A et al. Does the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials? A systematic review Med J Aust 2006 185 : 263 267.
22. Kane RL, Wang J, Garrard J. Reporting in randomized clinical trials improved after adoption of the CONSORT statement. J Clin Epidemiol 2007 60 : 241 249.
23. Devereaux PJ, Manns BJ, Ghali WA et al. 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 : 380 388.
24. Lee KP, Schotland M, Bacchetti P et al. Association of journal quality indicators with methodological quality of clinical research articles. JAMA 2002 287 : 2805 2808.
25. Mills E, Wu P, Gagnier J et al. An analysis of general medical and specialist journals that endorse CONSORT found that reporting was not enforced consistently. J Clin Epidemiol 2005 58 : 662 667.
26. Halpern SH, Darani R, Douglas MJ et al. Compliance with the CONSORT checklist in obstetric anaesthesia randomised controlled trials. Int J Obstet Anesth 2004 13 : 207 214.
27. Karri V. Randomised clinical trials in plastic surgery: survey of output and quality of reporting. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2006 59 : 787 796.
28. Sánchez-Thorin JC, Cortés MC, Montenegro M et al. The quality of reporting of randomized clinical trials published in Ophthalmology. Ophthalmology 2001 108 : 410 415.
29. Reed DA, Cook DA, Beckman T et al. Association between funding and quality of published medical education research. JAMA 2007 298 : 1002 1009.
30. Lexchin J, Bero LA, Djulbegovic B et al. Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review. BMJ 2003 326 : 1167 1170.
31. Barnes DE, Bero LA. Scientific quality of original research articles on environmental tobacco smoke. Tob Control 1997 6 : 19 26.
32. Pierie J-P, Walvoort H, Overbeke A. Readers' evaluation of effect of peer review and editing on quality of articles in the Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde. Lancet 1996 348 : 1480 1483.
33. Barbui C, Cipriani A, Malvini L et al. Validity of the impact factor of journals as a measure of randomized controlled trial quality. J Clin Psychiatry 2006 67 : 37 40.
34. Berghmans T, Meert AP, Mascaux C. Citation indexes do not reflect methodological quality in lung cancer randomised trials. Ann Oncol 2003 14 : 715 721.