Published methodological quality of randomized controlled trials does not reflect the actual quality assessed in protocols

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 65, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 602-609

  Mhaskar, Rahul ^a   Djulbegovic, Benjamin ^a,b   Magazin, Anja ^b   Soares, Heloisa P ^b   Kumar, Ambuj ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA   (United States)

^b H LEE MOFFITT CANCER CENTER AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

Bias; Methodological quality; Randomized trials; Sample size; Study protocols; Systematic review

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL PROTOCOL; EFFECT SIZE; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; PUBLISHING; RANDOM ERROR; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REVIEW; SAMPLE SIZE; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

EID: 84862807351     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.10.016     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. D. Moher, P. Ba, D. Jones, D.J. Cook, A.R. Jadad, and M. Moher Does quality of reports of randomized trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analysis? Lancet 352 1998 609 613
2. K. Huwiler-Muntener, P. Juni, C. Junker, and M. Egger Quality of reporting of randomized trials as a measure of methodologic quality JAMA 287 2002 2801 2804
3. D. Moher, A. Jones, L. Lepage, and CONSORT Group (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) Use of the CONSORT statement and quality of reports of randomized trials. A comparative before-and-after evaluation JAMA 285 2001 1992 1995
4. IOM Finding what works in health care: standards for systematic reviews 2011 Institute of Medicine of the National Academies Washington, DC
5. H.P. Soares, S. Daniels, A. Kumar, M. Clarke, C. Scott, and S. Swann Bad reporting does not mean bad methods for randomised trials: observational study of randomised controlled trials performed by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group BMJ 328 2004 22 24
6. C.L. Hill, M.P. LaValley, and D.T. Felson Discrepancy between published report and actual conduct of randomized clinical trials J Clin Epidemiol 55 2002 783 786
7. P.J. Devereaux, P.T. Choi, S. El-Dika, M. Bhandari, V.M. Montori, and H.J. Schunemann An observational study found that authors of randomized controlled trials frequently use concealment of randomization and blinding, despite the failure to report these methods J Clin Epidemiol 57 2004 1232 1236
8. L.L. Kjaergard, D. Nikolova, and C. Gluud Randomized clinical trials in HEPATOLOGY: predictors of quality Hepatology 30 1999 1134 1138
9. J.A. Singh, S. Murphy, and M. Bhandari Trial sample size, but not trial quality, is associated with positive study outcome J Clin Epidemiol 63 2010 154 162
10. L.L. Kjaergard, J. Villumsen, and C. Gluud Reported methodologic quality and discrepancies between large and small randomized trials in meta-analyses Ann Intern Med 135 2001 982 989
11. Djulbegovic B. 5 R01 NS052956-02: evaluation of quality of clinical trials' records. NIH/ORI. 2005-2007.
12. J.P. Higgins, D.G. Altman, P.C. Gotzsche, P. Juni, D. Moher, and A.D. Oxman The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials BMJ 343 2011 d5928
13. J. Tierney, L. Stewart, D. Ghersi, S. Burdett, and M. Sydes Practical methods for incorporating summary time-to-event data into meta-analysis Trials 8 2007 16
14. L. Wood, M. Egger, L. Gluud, K. Schulz, P. Juni, and D. Altman Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study BMJ 336 2008 601 605
15. W.J. Conover Practical nonparametric statistics 3rd ed. 1999 John Wiley & Sons New York
16. B. Rosner Fundamentals of biostatistics 6th ed. 2006 PWS-Kent Boston
17. A. Liberati, H.N. Himel, and T.C. Chalmers A quality assessment of randomized control trials of primary treatment of breast cancer J Clin Oncol 4 1986 942 951
18. G.A. Colditz, J.N. Miller, and F. Mosteller How study design affects outcomes in comparisons of therapy. I: medical Stat Med 8 1989 441 454
19. K.F. Schulz, I. Chalmers, R.J. Hayes, and D.G. Altman Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials JAMA 273 1995 408 412
20. P. Juni, D.G. Altman, and M. Egger Systematic reviews in health care: assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials BMJ 323 2001 42 46
21. C. Begg, M. Cho, S. Eastwood, R. Horton, D. Moher, and I. Olkin Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement JAMA 276 1996 637 639
22. K.F. Schulz, D.G. Altman, and D. Moher CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials BMJ 340 2010 c332
23. F. Godlee Publishing study protocols: making them visible will improve registration, reporting and recruitment BMC News Views 2 2001 4
24. R. Horton, and R. Smith Time to register randomised trials. The case is now unanswerable BMJ 319 1999 865 866
25. A. Tonks Registering clinical trials BMJ 319 1999 1565 1568
26. R.J. Simes Publication bias: the case for an international registry of clinical trials J Clin Oncol 4 1986 1529 1541