Watson Hunna J, Goodman Erica L, McLagan Nicole B, Joyce Tara, French Elizabeth, Willan Vivienne, Egan Sarah J
Department of Psychiatry, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Int J Eat Disord. 2017 May;50(5):459-470. doi: 10.1002/eat.22712. Epub 2017 May 10.
To investigate the quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of eating disorder prevention.
A systematic literature search was conducted in Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Collaboration Library to January 2016. Studies were included if they were RCTs that tested an eating disorder prevention program. We identified 96 studies with a total 15,350 participants (91% female, M age = 17 years) and rated quality with the Quality Rating Scale (QRS; Moncrieff et al., 2001).
The mean QRS score was 62% (SD = 13%). Several standards of quality were not frequently fulfilled (i.e., failed to achieve an optimal rating), for example, power calculation (85%), intent-to-treat analysis (54%), blinding of assessor (75%), representative sample (78%), adequate sample size (75%), and appropriate duration of trial including follow-up (67%). QRS was positively and significantly associated with publication year, number of authors, and PubMed-indexation.
Given the majority of eating disorder prevention studies had problems with trial quality, it is recommended that future RCTs follow quality checklists and CONSORT guidelines, that RCTs are registered, and protocols published in advance. In addition, funding bodies are called on to deliver the support needed to ensure that preventions for eating disorders are efficiently and cost-effectively achieved.
调查饮食失调预防随机对照试验（RCT）的质量。
截至2016年1月，在Medline、PsycINFO、Embase、Scopus和Cochrane协作图书馆进行了系统的文献检索。纳入的研究需为测试饮食失调预防项目的随机对照试验。我们确定了96项研究，共有15350名参与者（91%为女性，平均年龄=17岁），并使用质量评定量表（QRS；Moncrieff等人，2001年）对质量进行评分。
QRS平均得分为62%（标准差=13%）。一些质量标准未经常得到满足（即未达到最佳评分），例如，功效计算（85%）、意向性分析（54%）、评估者盲法（75%）、代表性样本（78%）、足够的样本量（75%）以及包括随访在内的适当试验持续时间（67%）。QRS与发表年份、作者数量和PubMed索引呈正相关且具有显著性。
鉴于大多数饮食失调预防研究存在试验质量问题，建议未来的随机对照试验遵循质量检查表和CONSORT指南，对随机对照试验进行注册，并提前公布方案。此外，呼吁资助机构提供所需支持，以确保饮食失调预防措施能够高效且经济地实现。
