Trustworthiness of randomized trials in endocrinology—A systematic survey

PLoS ONE

Volumn 14, Issue 2, 2019, Pages

  González González, José Gerardo ^a,b   Dorsey Treviño, Edgar Gerardo ^a,b   Alvarez Villalobos, Neri ^a,b,c   Barrera Flores, Francisco Jesús ^b   González Colmenero, Alejandro Díaz ^b   Quintanilla Sánchez, Carolina ^b   Montori, Victor M ^c   Rodriguez Gutierrez, Rene ^a,b,c  

^a HOSPITAL UNIVERSITARIO DR JOSÉ ELEUTERIO GONZÁLEZ   (Mexico)

^b Medicina UANL   (Mexico)

^c MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; ENDOCRINE SYSTEM; ENDOCRINOLOGY; HUMAN; MEDLINE; PARALLEL DESIGN; PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PROFIT; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RISK ASSESSMENT; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; BONE DISEASE; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE; DIABETES MELLITUS; ENDOCRINE DISEASE; FACTUAL DATABASE; METABOLISM; PATHOLOGY; RISK;

BONE DISEASES; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASES; DATABASES, FACTUAL; DIABETES MELLITUS; ENDOCRINE SYSTEM DISEASES; HUMANS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RISK;

EID: 85061864920     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0212360     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Montori VM. Evidence-based endocrinology. Treat Endocrinol. 2004; 3(1):1–10. PMID: 15743108
2. Cohen ND, Shaw JE. Diabetes: advances in treatment. Intern Med J. 2007; 37(6):383–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-5994.2007.01369.x PMID: 17535382
3. Kelly MP, Capewell S. Relative contributions of changes in risk factors and treatment to the reduction in coronary heart disease mortality. Health Development Agency. 2004.
4. Chu EK, Drazen JM. Asthma: one hundred years of treatment and onward. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2005; 171(11):1202–8. Epub 2005/03/22. https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.200502-257OE PMID: 15778490.
5. Lau BD, Haut ER. Practices to prevent venous thromboembolism: a brief review. BMJ quality & safety. 2014; 23(3):187–95. Epub 2013/05/28. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001782 PMID: 23708438; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC3932749.
6. Murad MH, Asi N, Alsawas M, Alahdab F. New evidence pyramid. Evidence Based Medicine. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmed-2016-110401 PMID: 27339128
7. Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, Horton R, Moher D, Olkin I, et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement. JAMA. 1996; 276(8):637–9. Epub 1996/08/28. PMID: 8773637.
8. Jackson JL, Srinivasan M, Rea J, Fletcher KE, Kravitz RL. The validity of peer review in a general medicine journal. PLoS One. 2011; 6(7):e22475. Epub 2011/07/30. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone. 0022475 PMID: 21799867; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC3143147.
9. Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, Jüni P, Moher D, Oxman AD, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2011; 343. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj. d5928 PMID: 22008217
10. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials. 1996; 17(1):1–12. Epub 1996/02/01. PMID: 8721797.
11. Lim SM, Shin ES, Lee SH, Seo KH, Jung YM, Jang JE. Tools for assessing quality and risk of bias by levels of evidence. J Korean Med Assoc. 2011; 54(4):419–29.
12. Clark L, Schmidt U, Tharmanathan P, Adamson J, Hewitt C, Torgerson D. Poor reporting quality of key Randomization and Allocation Concealment details is still prevalent among published RCTs in 2011: a review. J Eval Clin Pract. 2013; 19(4):703–7. Epub 2013/05/08. https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.12031PMID: 23648066.
13. Groves T. What makes a high quality clinical research paper? Oral Dis. 2010; 16(4):313–5. Epub 2010/ 03/18. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-0825.2010.01663.x PMID: 20233312.
14. Mills E, Wu P, Gagnier J, Heels-Ansdell D, Montori VM. An analysis of general medical and specialist journals that endorse CONSORT found that reporting was not enforced consistently. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005; 58(7):662–7. Epub 2005/06/09. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.01.004 PMID: 15939216.
15. Uetani K, Nakayama T, Ikai H, Yonemoto N, Moher D. Quality of reports on randomized controlled trials conducted in Japan: evaluation of adherence to the CONSORT statement. Intern Med. 2009; 48 (5):307–13. Epub 2009/03/03. PMID: 19252352.
16. Gandhi GY, Murad MH, Fujiyoshi A, Mullan RJ, Flynn DN, Elamin MB, et al. Patient-important outcomes in registered diabetes trials. JAMA. 2008; 299(21):2543–9. Epub 2008/06/05. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.299.21.2543 PMID: 18523223.
17. Gartlehner G, Thieda P, Hansen RA, Morgan LC, Shumate JA, Nissman DB. Inadequate reporting of trials compromises the applicability of systematic reviews. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009; 25 (3):323–30. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266462309990122 PMID: 19619351
18. Montori VM, Guyatt GH. Progress in evidence-based medicine. JAMA. 2008; 300(15):1814–6. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.300.15.1814 PMID: 18854545
19. Chalmers I, Glasziou P. Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence. The Lancet. 374(9683):86–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60329-9
20. 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(11):982–9. Epub 2001/12/04. PMID: 11730399.
21. Moher D, Pham B, Jones A, Cook DJ, Jadad AR, Moher M, et al. Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? Lancet. 1998; 352(9128):609–13. Epub 1998/09/24. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(98)01085-X PMID: 9746022.
22. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ. 2009; 339:b2535. Epub 2009/07/23. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2535 PMID: 19622551; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC2714657.
23. edited by Julian PTH, Sally G. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions: Chichester, West Sussex; Hoboken NJ: John Wiley & Sons, [2008] 2008; 2008.
24. InCites Journal Citation Reports. Available from: http://jcr.incites.thomsonreuters.com.
25. Bhandari M, Busse JW, Jackowski D, Montori VM, Schunemann H, Sprague S, et al. Association between industry funding and statistically significant pro-industry findings in medical and surgical randomized trials. CMAJ. 2004; 170(4):477–80. Epub 2004/02/19. PMID: 14970094; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC332713.
26. Montori VM, Wang YG, Alonso-Coello P, Bhagra S. Systematic Evaluation of the Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials in Diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2006; 29(8):1833–8. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc06-0077 PMID: 16873788
27. Higgins JPT SJ, Savović J, Page MJ, Hróbjartsson A, Boutron I, Reeves B, Eldridge S. A revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized trials. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;(10). https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD201601
28. Devereaux PJ, Choi PT, El-Dika S, Bhandari M, Montori VM, Schunemann HJ, et al. 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. 2004; 57(12):1232–6. Epub 2004/12/25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.03.017 PMID: 15617948.
29. Bridoux V, Moutel G, Roman H, Kianifard B, Michot F, Herve C, et al. Methodological and Ethical Quality of Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials in Gastrointestinal Surgery. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012; 16 (9):1758–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-012-1952-0 PMID: 22777055
30. Chen X, Zhai X, Wang X, Su J, Li M. Methodological reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in three spine journals from 2010 to 2012. Eur Spine J. 2014; 23(8):1606–11. Epub 2014/04/22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-014-3283-1 PMID: 24748442.
31. Lee JW, Chung JH, Jo JK, Lee SW. Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials published in neurourology and urodynamics from 1993 to 2012. Neurourol Urodyn. 2014; 33(5):472–4. Epub 2013/ 07/23. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.22457 PMID: 23868818.
32. Jo JK, Chung JH, Kim KS, Song SH, Lee SW. Reporting of randomized controlled trials in andrology journals: a quality assessment. J Sex Med. 2015; 12(2):350–7. Epub 2014/12/30. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsm.12784 PMID: 25537865.
33. McIver B DS. An overview of randomized controlled trials in non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus. Diabetologia. 1996; 39(A193).
34. Rios LP, Odueyungbo A, Moitri MO, Rahman MO, Thabane L. Quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials in general endocrinology literature. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2008; 93(10):3810–6. Epub 2008/06/28. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2008-0817 PMID: 18583463.
35. Brito JP, Domecq JP, Murad MH, Guyatt GH, Montori VM. The Endocrine Society guidelines: when the confidence cart goes before the evidence horse. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2013; 98(8):3246–52. Epub 2013/06/21. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2013-1814 PMID: 23783104.
36. Grimshaw JM, Russell IT. Achieving health gain through clinical guidelines II: Ensuring guidelines change medical practice. Qual Health Care. 1994; 3(1):45. PMID: 10136260
37. Montori VM, Brito J, Murad M. The optimal practice of evidence-based medicine: Incorporating patient preferences in practice guidelines. JAMA. 2013; 310(23):2503–4. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013. 281422 PMID: 24165826
38. Alexander PE, Brito JP, Neumann I, Gionfriddo MR, Bero L, Djulbegovic B, et al. World Health Organization strong recommendations based on low-quality evidence (study quality) are frequent and often inconsistent with GRADE guidance. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016; 72:98–106. Epub 2015/01/27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.10.011 PMID: 25618534.
39. Alexander PE, Bero L, Montori VM, Brito JP, Stoltzfus R, Djulbegovic B, et al. World Health Organization recommendations are often strong based on low confidence in effect estimates. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014; 67(6):629–34. Epub 2014/01/07. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.09.020 PMID: 24388966.
40. Mahtani KR.’Spin’ in reports of clinical research. Evid Based Med. 2016; 21(6):201–2. Epub 2016/10/ 16. https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmed-2016-110570 PMID: 27737894.
41. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) Methodology Standards [cited 2018 August, 13]. Available from: https://www.pcori.org/research-results/about-our-research/research-methodology/pcori-methodology-standards.
42. Scott A, Rucklidge JJ, Mulder RT. Is Mandatory Prospective Trial Registration Working to Prevent Publication of Unregistered Trials and Selective Outcome Reporting? An Observational Study of Five Psychiatry Journals That Mandate Prospective Clinical Trial Registration. PLoS One. 2015; 10(8). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0133718 PMID: 26287998; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC4546113.
43. Fredrickson MJ, Ilfeld BM. Prospective trial registration for clinical research: what is it, what is it good for, and why do I care? Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2011; 36(6):619–24. Epub 2011/10/13. https://doi.org/10.1097/AAP.0b013e318230fbc4 PMID: 21989152.
44. Zarin DA, Tse T, Williams RJ, Carr S. Trial Reporting in ClinicalTrials.gov—The Final Rule. N Engl J Med. 2016; 375(20):1998–2004. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsr1611785 PMID: 27635471.
45. Consort:Transparent Reporting of Trials. Consort—Welcome to the CONSORT. Welcome to the CONSORT. [February 22, 2018]. Available from: http://www.consort-statement.org/.
46. Plint AC, Moher D, Morrison A, Schulz K, Altman DG, Hill C, et al. Does the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials? A systematic review. Med J Aust. 2006; 185(5):263–7. Epub 2006/09/05. PMID: 16948622.
47. Singh Ospina N, Rodriguez-Gutierrez R, Brito JP, Young WF Jr., Montori VM. Is the endocrine research pipeline broken? A systematic evaluation of the Endocrine Society clinical practice guidelines and trial registration. BMC Med. 2015; 13:187. Epub 2015/08/13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0435-zPMID: 26265226; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC4533940.