Poor reporting quality of key Randomization and Allocation Concealment details is still prevalent among published RCTs in 2011: A review

Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 703-707

  Clark, Laura ^a   Schmidt, Ulrike ^a   Tharmanathan, Puvan ^a   Adamson, Joy ^a   Hewitt, Catherine ^a   Torgerson, David ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

allocation concealment; meta regression; methodological review; randomized controlled trials (RCT); reporting quality; trial methodology

Indexed keywords

ALLOCATION CONCEALMENT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; HUMAN; MEDICAL INFORMATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC);

ALLOCATION CONCEALMENT; META-REGRESSION; METHODOLOGICAL REVIEW; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS (RCT); REPORTING QUALITY; TRIAL METHODOLOGY;

HUMANS; RANDOM ALLOCATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 84881154017     PISSN: 13561294     EISSN: 13652753     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/jep.12031     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Cartwright, N., (2007) Are RCTs the gold standard? Biosocieties, 2 (01), 11-20.
2. Dechartres, A., Charles, P., Hopewell, S., Ravaud, P., &, Altman, D. G., (2011) Reviews assessing the quality or the reporting of randomized controlled trials are increasing over time but raised questions about how quality is assessed. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 64 (2), 136-144.
3. Schulz, K. F., Altman, D. G., &, Moher, D., (2010) CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMC Medicine, 8 (1), 18.
4. Turner, L., Shamseer, L., Altman, D. G., Schulz, K. F., &, Moher, D., (2012) Does use of the CONSORT Statement impact the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials published in medical journals. A Cochrane Review. Systematic Review, 1, 60.
5. Altman, D. G., (1996) Better reporting of randomised controlled trials: the CONSORT statement. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.), 313 (7057), 570-571.
6. Schulz, K. F., (1995) Subverting randomization in controlled trials. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 274 (18), 1456.
7. Schulz, K. F., Chalmers, I., Hayes, R. J., &, Altman, D. G., (1995) Empirical evidence of bias. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 273 (5), 408-412.
8. Viera, A. J., &, Bangdiwala, S. I., (2007) Eliminating bias in randomized controlled trials: importance of allocation concealment and masking. Family Medicine-Kansas City, 39 (2), 132.
9. Doig, G. S., &, Simpson, F., (2005) Randomization and allocation concealment: a practical guide for researchers. Journal of Critical Care, 20 (2), 187-191.
10. Herbison, P., Hay-Smith, J., &, Gillespie, W. J., (2011) Different methods of allocation to groups in randomized trials are associated with different levels of bias. A meta-epidemiological study. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 64 (10), 1070-1075.
11. Altman, D. G., &, Schulz, K. F., (2001) Statistics notes: concealing treatment allocation in randomised trials. British Medical Journal, 323 (7310), 446.
12. Altman, D. G., &, Bland, J. M., (1999) Statistics notes: how to randomise. BMJ. British Medical Journal, 319 (7211), 703.
13. Hewitt, C. E., &, Torgerson, D. J., (2006) Research methods: is restricted randomisation necessary? British Medical Journal, 332 (7556), 1506.
14. Lefebvre, C., Manheimer, E., &, Glanville, J., Chapter 6: Box 6.4.a Searching for studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011.
15. US National Lilbrary of Health, N.I.o.H Abridged Index Medicus (AIM or 'Core Clinical') Journal Titles. 2011; Available at: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/bsd/ aim.html (last accessed 3 March 2011).
16. Higgins, J. P. T., Altman, D. G., &, Sterne, J. A. C., (eds) Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available at: http://www.cochrane-handbook.org.2011 (last accessed 13 February 2011).
17. Hewitt, C., Hahn, S., Torgerson, D. J., Watson, J., &, Bland, J. M., (2005) Adequacy and reporting of allocation concealment: review of recent trials published in four general medical journals. British Medical JournalJ, 330 (7499), 1057-1058.
18. Schulz, K. F., &, Grimes, D. A., (2002) Generation of allocation sequences in randomised trials: chance, not choice. The Lancet, 359 (9305), 515-519.
19. CONSORT CONSORT endorsers. [24 May 2011 ]; Available at: http://www.consort-statement.org/about-consort/consort-endorsement/ consort-endorsers-journals/ (last accessed 13 February 2011).
20. Falagas, M. E., Grigori, T., &, Ioannidou, E., (2009) A systematic review of trends in the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials in various research fields. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 62 (3), 227-231. e9.
21. Moher, D., Jones, A., &, LePage, L., (2001) Use of the CONSORT statement and quality of reports of randomized trials: a comparative before-and-after evaluation. JAMA: the Journal of the American Medical Association, 285 (15), 1992-1995.
22. Plint, A. C., Moher, D., Morrison, A., Schulz, K., Altman, D. G., Hill, C., &, Gaboury, I., (2006) Does the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials? A systematic review. Medical Journal of Australia, 185 (5), 263.
23. Registry, I. C. T., (2013) International Clinical Trials Registry. Available at: http://www.who.int/ictrp/en/ (last accessed 2 April 2013).