Methodological reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in 3 leading diabetes journals from 2011 to 2013 following CONSORT statement

Medicine (United States)

Volumn 94, Issue 27, 2015, Pages e1083-

  Zhai, Xiao ^a   Wang, Yiran ^a   Mu, Qingchun ^b,c   Chen, Xiao ^d   Huang, Qin ^a   Wang, Qijin ^a   Li, Ming ^a  

^a SECOND MILITARY MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b JILIN UNIVERSITY   (China)

^c MUDANJIANG MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

^d NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ASIA; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DIABETES MELLITUS; EUROPE; HUMAN; INTENTION TO TREAT ANALYSIS; MEDICAL LITERATURE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; UNITED STATES; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; METHODOLOGY; PUBLICATION; STANDARDS; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

DIABETES MELLITUS; FINANCIAL SUPPORT; HUMANS; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 84941125958     PISSN: 00257974     EISSN: 15365964     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000001083     Document Type: Review

References (32)

1. Chalmers TC, Smith H Jr, Blackburn B, et al. A method for assessing the quality of a randomized control trial. Control Clin Trials. 1981; 2: 31-49
2. Allen TW. Guide to clinical preventive services. Report of the US Preventive Services Task Force. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 1991; 91: 281-289
3. Moher D, Altman DG, Schulz KF, et al. Opportunities and challenges for improving the quality of reporting clinical research: CONSORT and beyond. CMAJ. 2004; 171: 349-350
4. Moher D, Pham B, Jones A, et al. Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-Analyses? Lancet. 1998; 352: 609-613
5. Kjaergard LL, Villumsen J, Gluud C. Reported methodologic quality and discrepancies between large and small randomized trials in meta-Analyses. Ann Intern Med. 2001; 135: 982-989
6. Chen X, Zhai X, Wang X, et al. Methodological reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in three spine journals from 2010 to 2012. Eur Spine J. 2014; 23: 1606-1611
7. Juni P, Altman DG, Egger M. Systematic reviews in health care: Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. BMJ. 2001; 323: 42-46
8. http://www.consort-statement.org/
9. A proposal for structured reporting of randomized controlled trials The Standards of Reporting Trials Group. JAMA. 1994; 272: 1926-1931
10. 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
11. Cui Q, Tian J, Song X, et al. Does the CONSORT checklist for abstracts improve the quality of reports of randomized controlled trials on clinical pathways? J Eval Clin Pract. 2014; 20: 827-833
12. Ahmed Ali U, van der Sluis PC, Issa Y, et al. Trends in worldwide volume and methodological quality of surgical randomized controlled trials. Ann Surg. 2013; 258: 199-207
13. Bai Y, Gao J, Zou DW, et al. Methodological reporting of randomized clinical trials in major gastroenterology and hepatology journals in 2006. Hepatology. 2009; 49: 2108-2112
14. Shi C, Tian J, Ren D, et al. Methodological reporting of randomized trials in five leading Chinese nursing journals. PLoS One. 2014; 9: e113002
15. Kitabchi AE, Umpierrez GE, Miles JM, et al. Hyperglycemic crises in adult patients with diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2009; 32: 1335-1343
16. Shi Y, Hu FB The global implications of diabetes and cancer. Lancet. 2014; 383: 1947-1948
17. Bai Y, Wu YF, Wang D, et al. Internal validity of randomized controlled trials reported in major gastrointestinal and surgical endoscopy journals in 2008. Surg Endosc. 2010; 24: 1158-1163
18. Robinson KA, Dickersin K. Development of a highly sensitive search strategy for the retrieval of reports of controlled trials using PubMed. Int J Epidemiol. 2002; 31: 150-153
19. Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011): The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011 The Cochrane Collaboration 2011. 2011
20. Wood L, Egger M, Gluud LL, et al. Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ. 2008; 336: 601-605
21. Greenhalgh T, Howick J, Maskrey N. Evidence based medicine: a movement in crisis?. BMJ. 2014; 348: g3725
22. Tricoci P, Allen JM, Kramer JM, et al. Scientific evidence underlying the ACC/AHA clinical practice guidelines. JAMA. 2009; 301: 831-841
23. Feuerstein JD, Gifford AE, Akbari M, et al. Systematic analysis underlying the quality of the scientific evidence and conflicts of interest in gastroenterology practice guidelines. Am J Gastroenterol. 2013; 108: 1686-1693
24. Altman DG, Moher D, Schulz KF. Improving the reporting of randomised trials: the CONSORT Statement and beyond. Stat Med. 2012; 31: 2985-2997
25. Lachin JM. Statistical properties of randomization in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1988; 9: 289-311
26. Forder PM, Gebski VJ, Keech AC. Allocation concealment and blinding: when ignorance is bliss. Med J Aust. 2005; 182: 87-89
27. Pildal J, Chan AW, Hrobjartsson A, et al. Comparison of descriptions of allocation concealment in trial protocols and the published reports: cohort study. BMJ. 2005; 330: 1049-1052
28. Schulz KF, Grimes DA. Generation of allocation sequences in randomised trials: chance, not choice. Lancet. 2002; 359: 515-519
29. Hewitt C, Hahn S, Torgerson DJ, et al. Adequacy and reporting of allocation concealment: review of recent trials published in four general medical journals. BMJ. 2005; 330: 1057-1058
30. Auleley GR, Giraudeau B, Baron G, et al The methods for handling missing data in clinical trials influence sample size requirements. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004; 57: 447-453
31. Zavitsanos PJ, Bird VG, Mince KA, et al. Low methodological and reporting quality of randomized, controlled trials of devices to treat urolithiasis. J Urol. 2014; 191: 988-993
32. Gao J, Deng G, Hu Y, et al. Quality of reporting on randomized controlled trials on recurrent spontaneous abortion in China. Trials. 2015; 16: 172-178