• Contemp Clin Trials · Jul 2014

    Review

    Improvement in the quality of abstracts in major clinical journals since CONSORT extension for abstracts: a systematic review.

    • Lawrence Mbuagbaw, Michael Thabane, Thuva Vanniyasingam, Victoria Borg Debono, Sarah Kosa, Shiyuan Zhang, Chenglin Ye, Sameer Parpia, Brittany B Dennis, and Lehana Thabane.
    • Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada; Biostatistics Unit, Father Sean O'Sullivan Research Centre, St Joseph's Healthcare-Hamilton, ON, Canada; Centre for Development of Best Practices in Health, Yaoundé Central Hospital, Yaoundé, Cameroon; South African Cochrane Centre, South African Medical Research Council, South Africa. Electronic address: mbuagblc@mcmaster.ca.
    • Contemp Clin Trials. 2014 Jul 1; 38 (2): 245-50.

    BackgroundWe sought to determine if the publication of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT)(1) extension for abstracts in 2008 had led to an improvement in reporting abstracts of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).(2) METHODS: We searched PubMed for RCTs published in 2007 and 2012 in top-tier general medicine journals. A random selection of 100 trial abstracts was obtained for each year. Data were extracted in duplicate on the adherence to the CONSORT extension for abstracts. The primary outcome was the mean number of items reported and the secondary outcome was the odds of reporting each item. We also estimated incidence rate ratios (IRRs).(3) RESULTS: Significantly more checklist items were reported in 2012 than in 2007: adjusted mean difference was 2.91 (95% confidence interval [CI](4) 2.35, 3.41; p<0.001). In 2012 there were significant improvements in reporting the study as randomized in the title, describing the trial design, the participants, and objectives and blinding. In the Results section, trial status and numbers analyzed were also reported better. The IRRs were significantly higher for 2012 (IRR 1.32; 95% CI 1.25, 1.39; p<0.001) and in multisite studies compared to single site studies (IRR 1.08; 95% CI 1.03, 1.15; p=0.006).ConclusionsThere was a significant improvement in the reporting of abstracts of RCTs in 2012 compared to 2007. However, there is still room for improvement as some items remain under-reported.Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,694,794 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.