Cargando…

Poor reporting quality of randomized controlled trials comparing treatments of COVID-19–A retrospective cross-sectional study on the first year of publications

INTRODUCTION: Transparent and complete reporting of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is essential for critical scientific appraisal of the results. It has been argued whether publications during the COVID-19 pandemic have met reporting standards. In this study, we assessed reporting adherence of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Grüßer, Linda, Eißing, Charlotte, Kowark, Ana, Keszei, András P., Wallqvist, Julia, Rossaint, Rolf, Ziemann, Sebastian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10578566/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37844082
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0292860
_version_ 1785121543801536512
author Grüßer, Linda
Eißing, Charlotte
Kowark, Ana
Keszei, András P.
Wallqvist, Julia
Rossaint, Rolf
Ziemann, Sebastian
author_facet Grüßer, Linda
Eißing, Charlotte
Kowark, Ana
Keszei, András P.
Wallqvist, Julia
Rossaint, Rolf
Ziemann, Sebastian
author_sort Grüßer, Linda
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Transparent and complete reporting of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is essential for critical scientific appraisal of the results. It has been argued whether publications during the COVID-19 pandemic have met reporting standards. In this study, we assessed reporting adherence of RCTs on treatment interventions in COVID-19 patients to the CONSORT checklist and discuss which lessons can be learned to improve reporting in the future. METHODS: This was a retrospective, cross-sectional study performed at the University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Germany. We conducted a pragmatic systematic literature search in the PubMed database to identify RCTs on treatment interventions in COVID-19 patients in the first year of publications on the topic (March 2020-February 2021). We investigated the adherence of each publication to the CONSORT checklist and assessed the association between specific predictors and percentage adherence in an exploratory multivariable regression model. RESULTS: We analyzed 127 RCTs and found that the median percentage adherence to the CONSORT checklist was 54.3% [IQR 38.9 to 65.7]. In the exploratory multivariable regression model, the impact factor (highest tertile of impact factor compared to lowest tertile ß = 21.77, 95% CI 13.89 to 29.66, p<0.001; middle tertile compared lowest tertile ß = 11.79, 95% CI 5.74 to 17.84, p<0.001)) and authors’ referral to the CONSORT statement (ß = 9.29, 95% CI 2.98 to 15.60, p = 0.004) were associated with a higher percentage adherence to the CONSORT checklist. CONCLUSION: The reporting quality of RCTs on treatment interventions in COVID-19 patients during the first year of publications was poor. Measures to improve reporting quality are urgently needed.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10578566
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105785662023-10-17 Poor reporting quality of randomized controlled trials comparing treatments of COVID-19–A retrospective cross-sectional study on the first year of publications Grüßer, Linda Eißing, Charlotte Kowark, Ana Keszei, András P. Wallqvist, Julia Rossaint, Rolf Ziemann, Sebastian PLoS One Research Article INTRODUCTION: Transparent and complete reporting of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is essential for critical scientific appraisal of the results. It has been argued whether publications during the COVID-19 pandemic have met reporting standards. In this study, we assessed reporting adherence of RCTs on treatment interventions in COVID-19 patients to the CONSORT checklist and discuss which lessons can be learned to improve reporting in the future. METHODS: This was a retrospective, cross-sectional study performed at the University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Germany. We conducted a pragmatic systematic literature search in the PubMed database to identify RCTs on treatment interventions in COVID-19 patients in the first year of publications on the topic (March 2020-February 2021). We investigated the adherence of each publication to the CONSORT checklist and assessed the association between specific predictors and percentage adherence in an exploratory multivariable regression model. RESULTS: We analyzed 127 RCTs and found that the median percentage adherence to the CONSORT checklist was 54.3% [IQR 38.9 to 65.7]. In the exploratory multivariable regression model, the impact factor (highest tertile of impact factor compared to lowest tertile ß = 21.77, 95% CI 13.89 to 29.66, p<0.001; middle tertile compared lowest tertile ß = 11.79, 95% CI 5.74 to 17.84, p<0.001)) and authors’ referral to the CONSORT statement (ß = 9.29, 95% CI 2.98 to 15.60, p = 0.004) were associated with a higher percentage adherence to the CONSORT checklist. CONCLUSION: The reporting quality of RCTs on treatment interventions in COVID-19 patients during the first year of publications was poor. Measures to improve reporting quality are urgently needed. Public Library of Science 2023-10-16 /pmc/articles/PMC10578566/ /pubmed/37844082 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0292860 Text en © 2023 Grüßer et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Grüßer, Linda
Eißing, Charlotte
Kowark, Ana
Keszei, András P.
Wallqvist, Julia
Rossaint, Rolf
Ziemann, Sebastian
Poor reporting quality of randomized controlled trials comparing treatments of COVID-19–A retrospective cross-sectional study on the first year of publications
title Poor reporting quality of randomized controlled trials comparing treatments of COVID-19–A retrospective cross-sectional study on the first year of publications
title_full Poor reporting quality of randomized controlled trials comparing treatments of COVID-19–A retrospective cross-sectional study on the first year of publications
title_fullStr Poor reporting quality of randomized controlled trials comparing treatments of COVID-19–A retrospective cross-sectional study on the first year of publications
title_full_unstemmed Poor reporting quality of randomized controlled trials comparing treatments of COVID-19–A retrospective cross-sectional study on the first year of publications
title_short Poor reporting quality of randomized controlled trials comparing treatments of COVID-19–A retrospective cross-sectional study on the first year of publications
title_sort poor reporting quality of randomized controlled trials comparing treatments of covid-19–a retrospective cross-sectional study on the first year of publications
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10578566/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37844082
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0292860
work_keys_str_mv AT grußerlinda poorreportingqualityofrandomizedcontrolledtrialscomparingtreatmentsofcovid19aretrospectivecrosssectionalstudyonthefirstyearofpublications
AT eißingcharlotte poorreportingqualityofrandomizedcontrolledtrialscomparingtreatmentsofcovid19aretrospectivecrosssectionalstudyonthefirstyearofpublications
AT kowarkana poorreportingqualityofrandomizedcontrolledtrialscomparingtreatmentsofcovid19aretrospectivecrosssectionalstudyonthefirstyearofpublications
AT keszeiandrasp poorreportingqualityofrandomizedcontrolledtrialscomparingtreatmentsofcovid19aretrospectivecrosssectionalstudyonthefirstyearofpublications
AT wallqvistjulia poorreportingqualityofrandomizedcontrolledtrialscomparingtreatmentsofcovid19aretrospectivecrosssectionalstudyonthefirstyearofpublications
AT rossaintrolf poorreportingqualityofrandomizedcontrolledtrialscomparingtreatmentsofcovid19aretrospectivecrosssectionalstudyonthefirstyearofpublications
AT ziemannsebastian poorreportingqualityofrandomizedcontrolledtrialscomparingtreatmentsofcovid19aretrospectivecrosssectionalstudyonthefirstyearofpublications