Suppr超能文献

术后疼痛管理荟萃分析中使用的 RCT 报告质量,采用 CONSORT 声明。

The quality of reporting of RCTs used within a postoperative pain management meta-analysis, using the CONSORT statement.

机构信息

Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, 1200 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, L8N 3Z5, Canada.

出版信息

BMC Anesthesiol. 2012 Jul 4;12:13. doi: 10.1186/1471-2253-12-13.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are routinely used in systematic reviews and meta-analyses that help inform healthcare and policy decision making. The proper reporting of RCTs is important because it acts as a proxy for health care providers and researchers to appraise the quality of the methodology, conduct and analysis of an RCT. The aims of this study are to analyse the overall quality of reporting in 23 RCTs that were used in a meta-analysis by assessing 3 key methodological items, and to determine factors associated with high quality of reporting. It is hypothesized that studies with larger sample sizes, that have funding reported, that are published in journals with a higher impact factor and that are in journals that have adopted or endorsed the CONSORT statement will be associated with better overall quality of reporting and reporting of key methodological items.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed RCTs used within an anesthesiology related post-operative pain management meta-analysis. We included all of the 23 RCTs used, all of which were parallel design that addressed the use of femoral nerve block in improving outcomes after total knee arthroplasty. Data abstraction was done independently by two reviewers. The two main outcomes were: 1) 15 point overall quality of reporting score (OQRS) based on the Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials (CONSORT) and 2) 3 point key methodological item score (KMIS) based on allocation concealment, blinding and intention-to-treat analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-three RCTs were included. The median OQRS was 9.0 (Interquartile Range = 3). A multivariable regression analysis did not show any significant association between OQRS or KMIS and our four predictor variables hypothesized to improve reporting. The direction and magnitude of our results when compared to similar studies suggest that the sample size and impact factor are associated with improved key methodological item reporting.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of reporting of RCTs used within an anesthesia related meta-analysis is poor to moderate. The information gained from this study should be used by journals to register the urgency for RCTs to be clear and transparent in reporting to help make literature accessible and comparable.

摘要

背景

随机对照试验(RCT)常用于系统评价和荟萃分析,以帮助制定医疗保健和政策决策。RCT 的正确报告很重要,因为它可以作为医疗保健提供者和研究人员评估 RCT 方法学、实施和分析质量的代表。本研究的目的是通过评估 3 个关键方法学项目,分析 23 项用于荟萃分析的 RCT 的整体报告质量,并确定与高质量报告相关的因素。研究假设,样本量较大、有资金报告、发表在影响因子较高的期刊上、且采用或认可 CONSORT 声明的研究,其报告的整体质量和关键方法学项目的报告质量会更好。

方法

我们系统地回顾了一项关于麻醉学相关术后疼痛管理的荟萃分析中使用的 RCT。我们纳入了所有 23 项用于该荟萃分析的 RCT,这些 RCT 均为平行设计,旨在探讨股神经阻滞在改善全膝关节置换术后结局中的作用。数据提取由两位评审员独立完成。两个主要结果是:1)基于 CONSORT 的 15 分整体报告质量评分(OQRS);2)基于分配隐藏、盲法和意向治疗分析的 3 分关键方法学项目评分(KMIS)。

结果

纳入了 23 项 RCT。OQRS 的中位数为 9.0(四分位距 = 3)。多变量回归分析未显示 OQRS 或 KMIS 与我们假设的四个改善报告的预测变量之间存在任何显著关联。与类似研究相比,我们的结果方向和幅度表明,样本量和影响因子与改进关键方法学项目报告有关。

结论

在麻醉学相关荟萃分析中使用的 RCT 的报告质量较差至中等。从这项研究中获得的信息应被期刊用来登记 RCT 报告清晰透明的紧迫性,以帮助使文献更易于获取和比较。

相似文献

4
Reporting Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials of Periodontal Diseases in Journal Abstracts-A Cross-sectional Survey and Bibliometric Analysis.
J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2018 Jun;18(2):130-141.e22. doi: 10.1016/j.jebdp.2017.08.005. Epub 2017 Sep 21.
5
Quality of reporting for randomized controlled trials in the hypospadias literature: Where do we stand?
J Pediatr Urol. 2017 Oct;13(5):482.e1-482.e9. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2017.03.031. Epub 2017 Apr 24.
6
Quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials in chiropractic using the CONSORT checklist.
Chiropr Man Therap. 2016 Jun 9;24:19. doi: 10.1186/s12998-016-0099-6. eCollection 2016.
7
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
8
Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials from two leading cancer journals using the CONSORT statement.
Hematol Oncol Stem Cell Ther. 2008 Jan-Mar;1(1):38-43. doi: 10.1016/s1658-3876(08)50059-8.

引用本文的文献

3
A tutorial on methodological studies: the what, when, how and why.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020 Sep 7;20(1):226. doi: 10.1186/s12874-020-01107-7.
4
Assessing the Quality of Abstracts in Randomized Controlled Trials Published in High Impact Cardiovascular Journals.
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2019 May;12(5):e005260. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.118.005260.
6
Quality of pilot trial abstracts in heart failure is suboptimal: a systematic survey.
Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2018 May 31;4:107. doi: 10.1186/s40814-018-0302-8. eCollection 2018.
7
Quality of abstracts of pilot trials in heart failure: A protocol for a systematic survey.
Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2017 Nov 7;8:258-263. doi: 10.1016/j.conctc.2017.11.004. eCollection 2017 Dec.
8
Quality of abstracts of randomized control trials in five top pain journals: A systematic survey.
Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2017 Jun 9;7:64-68. doi: 10.1016/j.conctc.2017.06.001. eCollection 2017 Sep.

本文引用的文献

2
Quality of randomized controlled trials reporting in the treatment of sarcomas.
J Clin Oncol. 2011 Mar 20;29(9):1204-9. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2010.30.9369. Epub 2011 Feb 14.
3
The ethics of clinical research.
J Hand Surg Am. 2011 Feb;36(2):308-15. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2010.11.012.
4
The blind leading the blind: use and misuse of blinding in randomized controlled trials.
Contemp Clin Trials. 2011 Mar;32(2):240-3. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2010.11.004. Epub 2010 Nov 9.
7
[CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (Chinese version)].
Zhong Xi Yi Jie He Xue Bao. 2010 Jul;8(7):604-12. doi: 10.3736/jcim20100702.
8
Influence of trial registration on reporting quality of randomized trials: study from highest ranked journals.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2010 Nov;63(11):1216-22. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.01.013. Epub 2010 Apr 28.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验