Assessing the Compliance of Randomized Controlled Trials Published in Craniofacial Surgery Journals With the CONSORT Statement

Borrelli, Mimi R.; Farwana, Reem; Andrew, Tom W.; Chicco, Maria; Abukhder, Munir; Mobarak, Dima; Thavayogan, Rachel; Agha, Riaz; Pidgeon, Thomas E.

doi:10.1097/scs.0000000000004900

Cited by 13 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Lack of adherence to guidelines has been widely reported in the literature. 13,14,21,22 Journal committees, such as the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), could act as a catalyst to improving the quality of reporting of large database studies by encouraging/requiring member journals to implement and enforce reporting statement policies. Additionally, further efforts should focus on incorporating reporting standards in research training, including a checklist for authors as part of the submission process, and assessing adherence to guidelines as a requirement of peer review to mitigate the risk of bias from under-reporting.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Appraising the Quality of Reporting of American College of Surgeons NSQIP Emergency General Surgery Studies

Moheb

Sabbagh

Badin

et al. 2021

Journal of the American College of Surgeons

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: The quality of emergency general surgery (EGS) studies that use the American College of Surgeons-National Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database is variable. We aimed to critically appraise the methodologic reporting of EGS ACS-NSQIP studies. STUDY DESIGN: We searched the PubMed ACS-NSQIP bibliography for EGS studies published from 2004 to 2019. The quality of reporting of each study was assessed according to the number of criteria fulfilled with respect to the 13-item RECORD statement and the 10-item JAMA Surgery checklist. Three criteria in each checklist were not applicable and were therefore excluded. An analysis was conducted comparing studies published in high and low impact factor (IF) journals. RESULTS:We identified a total of 99 eligible studies. Twenty-six percent of studies were published in high IF journals, and 73% of the journals had a policy requiring adherence to reporting statements. The median number of criteria fulfilled for the RECORD statement (out of 10 items) and the JAMA Surgery checklist (out of 7 items) were both equal to 4 (interquartile range [IQR] 3, 5). Sixty-three percent of studies did not explain the methodology for data cleaning, 81% of studies did not describe the population selection process, and 55% did not discuss the implications of missing variables. There were no differences in overall scores between studies published in high and low IF journals. CONCLUSIONS: The methodologic reporting of EGS studies using ACS-NSQIP remains suboptimal. Future efforts should focus on improving adherence to the policies to mitigate potential sources of bias and improve the credibility of large database studies.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Appraising the Quality of Reporting of American College of Surgeons NSQIP Emergency General Surgery Studies

Moheb

Sabbagh

Badin

et al. 2021

Journal of the American College of Surgeons

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several cross-sectional or retrospective systematic surveys have been done in dentistry to assess compliance with the CONSORT statement [ 40 – 45 ]. Consistent with our findings, none of them reports optimal compliance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While practically none of the journals in our study have an impact factor, our findings are consistent with this study because one of the items most frequently reported was a structured abstract, albeit with only 70% compliance. Borrelli et al used the impact factor report for 2016 to identify craniofacial surgery journals and assess RCT compliance with the CONSORT statement [ 45 ]. Like the previous study that only included journals with an impact factor, this study also found compliance with CONSORT to be 56% (minimum 33%, maximum 94%) of applicable items reported.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A multiyear systematic survey of the quality of reporting for randomised trials in dentistry, neurology and geriatrics published in journals of Spain and Latin America

Bachelet

Navarrete

Barrera-Riquelme

et al. 2021

BMC Med Res Methodol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The Iberoamerican Cochrane Network is currently developing an extensive project to identify Spanish-language journals that publish original clinical research in Spain and Latin America. The project is called BADERI (Database of Iberoamerican Essays and Journal) and feeds the research articles, mainly randomised clinical trials (RCTs), into CENTRAL (Cochrane Collaboration Central Register of Controlled Trials). This study aims to assess the quality of reporting of RCTs published in Spanish and Latin American journals for three clinical fields and assess changes over time. Methods We did a systematic survey with time trend analysis of RCTs for dentistry, geriatrics, and neurology. These fields were chosen for pragmatic reasons as they had not yet been completed in BADERI. After screening RCTs from 1990 to 2018 for randomised or quasi-randomised clinical trials, we extracted data for 23 CONSORT items. The primary outcome was the total score of the 23 predefined CONSORT 2010 items for each RCT (score range from 0 to 34). The secondary outcome measure was the score for each one of these 23 items. Results A total of 392 articles from 1990 to 2018 were included as follows: dentistry (282), neurology (80), and geriatrics (30). We found that the overall compliance score for the CONSORT items included in this study for all 392 RCTs analysed was 12.6 on a scale with a maximum score of 34. With time, the quality of reporting improved slightly for all RCTs. None of the articles achieved the complete individual CONSORT item compliance score. The lowest overall compliance percentage was for item 10 (Randomisation implementation) and item 24 (Protocol registration), with a dismal 1% compliance across all included RCTs, regardless of country. Conclusions CONSORT compliance is very poor in the 392 analysed RCTs. The impact of the CONSORT statement on improving the completeness of RCT reporting in Latin America and Spain is not clear. Iberoamerican journals should become more involved in endorsing and enforcing adherence to the CONSORT guidelines.

show abstract

“…[2] Consolidated standards of reporting trial flow chart should appear in the methods section for any RCT. [3]…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Writing the methods section

Eldawlatly

Meo

2019

Saudi J Anaesth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Methods section is the easiest part of the scientific paper and you can start writing it down even when the research is unfinished. It has to be written in the past tense because you have already written the proposal and either you have started or have conducted the study. The basic elements of the methods section are study design, setting and subjects, data collection, data analysis, and ethical approval.

show abstract

Assessing the Compliance of Randomized Controlled Trials Published in Craniofacial Surgery Journals With the CONSORT Statement

Cited by 13 publications

References 40 publications

Appraising the Quality of Reporting of American College of Surgeons NSQIP Emergency General Surgery Studies

Appraising the Quality of Reporting of American College of Surgeons NSQIP Emergency General Surgery Studies

A multiyear systematic survey of the quality of reporting for randomised trials in dentistry, neurology and geriatrics published in journals of Spain and Latin America

Writing the methods section

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About