Journal of clinical epidemiology
-
To determine the frequency of unpublished systematic reviews (SRs) and explore factors contributing to their occurrence. ⋯ Unpublished SRs do exist. Lack of time, funding, and organizational support were consistent reasons for not publishing SRs. Statistical significance of SR results was not reported as being a major barrier or reason for not publishing. Further research on unpublished SRs is warranted.
-
To propose a tool to assist trialists in making design decisions that are consistent with their trial's stated purpose. ⋯ We believe that PRECIS is a useful first step toward a tool that can help trialists to ensure that their design decisions are consistent with the stated purpose of the trial.
-
Methodologists have traditionally categorized randomized controlled trials (RCTs) as explanatory (representing the ideal setting) and pragmatic (representing the real-world setting). Although this framework has greatly advanced the design and interpretation of RCTs, current interpretations of the explanatory-pragmatic framework suffer from two major limitations. First, they confound purpose with structure. ⋯ This revised framework facilitates investigators' choice of optimal trial design, and clinicians' optimal interpretation of RCT results. If our goal is clinical trials most relevant to individual patient decision making, we will eschew the use of trials that enroll patients unlikely to benefit (e.g., those with uncertain diagnosis); those likely to be noncompliant; treated by practitioners whose differing expertise is likely to result in differing outcomes; and permitting cointerventions that are likely to influence treatment effectiveness-i.e., the conventional pragmatic trial. Instead we will design, implement, and apply the results of practical trials to our patients.
-
Review
The quality of reporting of trial abstracts is suboptimal: survey of major general medical journals.
To evaluate the quality of reporting of abstracts describing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in four major general medical journals. ⋯ The quality of reporting of RCT abstracts published in main general medical journals is suboptimal. Space limitations notwithstanding, with the recent recommendations from the CONSORT for Abstracts, it is expected that the transparency of abstract reporting can and should improve.
-
We sought to evaluate the trends in the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials in various medical fields. ⋯ Certain aspects of methodological quality have improved significantly over time, but others remain stagnant. Further efforts to improve study design, conduct, and reporting of randomized controlled trials are warranted.