Reporting quality of randomized controlled trial abstracts

Hua, Fang; Deng, Lijia; Kau, Chung How; Jiang, Han; He, Hong; Walsh, Tanya

doi:10.1016/j.adaj.2015.03.020

Cited by 41 publications

(64 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These findings are generally in line with previous studies in dentistry [9,11,13], dermatology [24], and oncology [15,25].…”

Section: Factors Associated With Abstract Reportingsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…In addition, less than 5% of the abstracts provided sufficient information for participants, outcome in the methods section, randomization, and trial registration. This pattern of inadequate reporting is generally in line with findings of several previous studies in dentistry [9,13,14] and other specialties [15][16][17], and indicates a lack of awareness of the CONSORT for Abstracts guidelines among researchers in the filed of laser medicine.…”

Section: Overall Reporting Qualitysupporting

confidence: 87%

“…Firstly, we only included four SCIE-indexed, high-impact journals in the field of laser medicine, thus our results may not be generalizable to RCT abstracts published in other laser medicine or general medical journals. However, using abstracts published in high-impact, SCIE-indexed journals as the materials of assessment is a method commonly used in previous similar research [8,9,14,26]. Second, with multivariable linear regression analysis we found that specialty area is a significant predictor of reporting quality.…”

Section: Limitations and Strengthsmentioning

confidence: 82%

“…Thereafter, all included abstracts were collated into a Word document with journal title, author names and author affiliations removed to allow for blinded quality assessment. [9] Assessment of reporting quality Two authors (L.J. and F.H.)…”

Section: Collection Of Abstractsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[7] In 2008, the CONSORT (CONsolidated Standards Of Reporting Trials) group released the CONSORT for Abstracts guidelines [7], providing guidance on the reporting of RCT abstracts in journals and conferences. However, according to recent studies, the reporting quality of RCT abstracts published in general medical journals [8] and specialty medical journals [9] remained suboptimal after the publication of CONSORT for Abstracts.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Reporting quality of randomized controlled trial abstracts published in leading laser medicine journals: an assessment using the CONSORT for abstracts guidelines

2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objectives of this study were to assess the reporting quality of randomized controlled trial (RCT) abstracts published in leading laser medicine journals, and investigate the association between potential predictors and reporting quality. A total of 129 RCT abstracts were included and assessed. The mean OCS was 4.5 (standard deviation, 1.3). Only three quality items (interventions, objective, conclusions) were reported adequately in most abstracts (>80%). No abstract adequately reported results for the primary outcome, source of funding, and status of the trial. In addition, sufficient reporting of participants, outcome in the methods section, randomization, and trial registration was rare (<5%). According to multivariable linear regression analysis, the specialty area of RCT abstracts was significantly associated with their reporting quality (P=0.008).The reporting quality of RCT abstracts published in leading laser medicine journals is suboptimal. Joint efforts by authors, editors and other stakeholders in the field to improve trial abstract reporting are needed.

show abstract

“…These findings are generally in line with previous studies in dentistry [9,11,13], dermatology [24], and oncology [15,25].…”

Section: Factors Associated With Abstract Reportingsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Overall Reporting Qualitysupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Limitations and Strengthsmentioning

confidence: 82%

Section: Collection Of Abstractsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Reporting quality of randomized controlled trial abstracts published in leading laser medicine journals: an assessment using the CONSORT for abstracts guidelines

2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Comparison of conference abstracts and full‐text publications of randomized controlled trials presented at four consecutive World Congresses of Pain: Reporting quality and agreement of results

Šarić

Vučić

Dragicevic

et al. 2018

European Journal of Pain

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Preparing Dental Students and Residents to Overcome Internal and External Barriers to Evidence‐Based Practice

Coleman¹,

Erley²,

Topolski

et al. 2016

Journal of Dental Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, evidence-based dentistry has become the ideal for research, academia, and clinical practice. However, barriers to implementation are many, including the complexity of interpreting conflicting evidence as well as difficulties in accessing it. Furthermore, many proponents of evidence-based care seem to assume that good evidence consistently exists and that clinicians can and will objectively evaluate data so as to apply the best evidence to individual patients' needs. The authors argue that these shortcomings may mislead many clinicians and that students should be adequately prepared to cope with some of the more complex issues surrounding evidence-based practice. Cognitive biases and heuristics shape every aspect of our lives, including our professional behavior. This article reviews literature from medicine, psychology, and behavioral economics to explore the barriers to implementing evidence-based dentistry. Internal factors include biases that affect clinical decision making: hindsight bias, optimism bias, survivor bias, and blind-spot bias. External factors include publication bias, corporate bias, and lack of transparency that may skew the available evidence in the peer-reviewed literature. Raising awareness of how these biases exert subtle influence on decision making and patient care can lead to a more nuanced discussion of addressing and overcoming barriers to evidence-based practice.

show abstract

Reporting quality of randomized controlled trial abstracts

Cited by 41 publications

References 33 publications

Reporting quality of randomized controlled trial abstracts published in leading laser medicine journals: an assessment using the CONSORT for abstracts guidelines

Reporting quality of randomized controlled trial abstracts published in leading laser medicine journals: an assessment using the CONSORT for abstracts guidelines

Comparison of conference abstracts and full‐text publications of randomized controlled trials presented at four consecutive World Congresses of Pain: Reporting quality and agreement of results

Preparing Dental Students and Residents to Overcome Internal and External Barriers to Evidence‐Based Practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About