Med Clin Barcelona
-
It has been repeatedly shown that the information supplied in publications of clinical trials is frequently insufficient or inaccurate and that some methodologic problems are associated with exaggerated estimates of the effect of healthcare interventions. To improve the quality of reports of clinical trials, a group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT statement (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials), a 22-item checklist (plus flow diagram), that can be used by authors, editors, reviewers, and readers. ⋯ This article presents the Spanish translation of the two elements integrating the revised CONSORT, the flow diagram and the 22-item checklist, and provides a short comment on each of them. Previous publications of the CONSORT statement and other useful resources such as examples of what are considered good communications may be obtained from the CONSORT web site (http://www.consort-statement.org).
-
The increase in the number of published systematic reviews and meta-analyses over the last few years has highlighted the need to establish guidelines for their publication, in order to facilitate their interpretation and use. The Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses Conference, which took place in 1996, resulted in the QUOROM statement, consisting of a checklist and flow diagram. ⋯ The flow diagram of randomized clinical trials (RCT) helps to provide information about the number of RCTs identified, included and excluded in the meta-analysis and the reasons for excluding them. Both tools provide standards for improving the quality of reporting of meta-analyses to make them rigorous, useful and reliable.
-
Healthcare research is extremely important, with the clear potential to influence treatment and prevention of disease, possibly on a global scale. Yet deficiencies in how research studies are reported are both well-documented and widespread across all medical specialties, types of interventions and study designs. Although randomised trials have received the most attention in this regard, similar concerns have been expressed about reporting of other types of research including diagnostic and epidemiological studies. ⋯ From this simple idea comes the scientific rationale of developing guidelines on how to report research. We consider desirable attributes of such guidelines, emphasising the importance of being evidence-based where possible. We describe recommended processes to produce guidelines that have evolved over several years during the preparation of a sequence of reporting guidelines including CONSORT, QUOROM, STARD and STROBE.
-
Clinical journals often publish economic evaluation studies of health technologies and programs. To improve the peer review process and, hence, the quality and validity of published studies, the British Medical Journal (BMJ) established publication guidelines for the publication of economic evaluations aimed at authors, reviewers and editors. ⋯ The article concludes that although this initiative would probably improve the review process and the quality of the papers published, it might be worthwhile to review, up-date and adapt the BMJ guidelines to the Spanish context by means of a consensus-forming process. Finally, this article discusses the limitations of the peer review process in improving the quality and validity of economic evaluations and suggests some complementary measures, drawing on lessons and experiences from the field of clinical research.