Department of UrologyHanyang University College of MedicineSeoulKorea.
Department of UrologyHanyang University Guri HospitalGuriKorea.
J Sex Med. 2014 Apr;11(4):894-900. doi: 10.1111/jsm.12455. Epub 2014 Feb 19.
Quality assessment of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) is important to prevent the adoption of findings of low-quality trials into clinical practice.
The aim if this study was to analyze the quality of studies reporting RCTs in the Journal of Sexual Medicine (JSM) and to find relevant clinical impact.
A quality assessment was conducted in all studies identified as RCTs published in the JSM from 2004 to 2012. The review period was divided into three periods: early (2004-2006), mid (2007-2009), and late (2010-2012).
The Jadad scale, van Tulder scale, and the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool (CCRBT) quality scoring instruments were used. The RCTs were also categorized by country of origin, topic, the inclusion of institutional review board (IRB) approval, funding, citation rate, and impact factor.
A total of 2,418 original articles were published in the JSM during the review period, and 188 were reports of RCTs. There were 39 (14.89%), 70 (7.77%), and 76 (6.29%) RCTs published during the early, mid, and late terms, respectively (P < 0.001). No significant increases in Jadad or van Tulder scale scores were found over time nor were there any significant changes in the number of low-risk articles as assessed by the CCRBT. However, significant differences in quality analysis were found in funding and IRB approval. Citation rates and impact factor were not correlated with RCT quality using any of the tools.
The number of original articles and RCTs published in the JSM increased over time. However, the ratio of RCTs to original articles did not increase significantly. Adequate randomization and blinding methods, IRB review, and financial support are required for the conduct of high-quality RCTs.
评估随机临床试验(RCT)的质量对于防止将低质量试验的结果应用于临床实践非常重要。
本研究旨在分析《性医学杂志》(JSM)中报告 RCT 的研究的质量,并发现相关的临床影响。
对 2004 年至 2012 年在 JSM 上发表的所有被确定为 RCT 的研究进行质量评估。审查期分为三个时期:早期(2004-2006 年)、中期(2007-2009 年)和晚期(2010-2012 年)。
使用 Jadad 量表、van Tulder 量表和 Cochrane 协作风险偏倚工具(CCRBT)质量评分工具。还按原产国、主题、机构审查委员会(IRB)批准的纳入、资金、引用率和影响因子对 RCT 进行分类。
在审查期间,JSM 共发表了 2418 篇原创文章,其中 188 篇为 RCT 报告。早期、中期和晚期分别发表了 39(14.89%)、70(7.77%)和 76(6.29%)的 RCT(P<0.001)。随着时间的推移,Jadad 或 van Tulder 量表评分没有显著增加,也没有任何使用 CCRBT 评估的低风险文章数量的显著变化。然而,在资金和 IRB 批准方面,质量分析存在显著差异。使用任何工具,引文率和影响因子都与 RCT 质量没有相关性。
JSM 发表的原创文章和 RCT 的数量随时间增加。然而,RCT 与原创文章的比例并没有显著增加。高质量 RCT 需要充分的随机化和盲法方法、IRB 审查和资金支持。