Cargando…

Cross-sectional analysis of the reporting of continuous outcome measures and clinical significance of results in randomized trials of non-pharmacological interventions

BACKGROUND: Reporting the scoring details of continuous outcome measures in randomized trials allows readers to interpret the size of any effect of the intervention. This study aimed to determine, in a sample of randomized trials: 1) the completeness of reporting of scoring details for continuous ou...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hoffmann, Tammy C, Thomas, Sarah T, Shin, Paul Ng Hung, Glasziou, Paul P
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4177425/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25230673
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-15-362
_version_ 1782336770740846592
author Hoffmann, Tammy C
Thomas, Sarah T
Shin, Paul Ng Hung
Glasziou, Paul P
author_facet Hoffmann, Tammy C
Thomas, Sarah T
Shin, Paul Ng Hung
Glasziou, Paul P
author_sort Hoffmann, Tammy C
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Reporting the scoring details of continuous outcome measures in randomized trials allows readers to interpret the size of any effect of the intervention. This study aimed to determine, in a sample of randomized trials: 1) the completeness of reporting of scoring details for continuous outcome measures, and 2) whether trial authors comment on the clinical significance of statistically significant trial results. METHODS: A descriptive analysis of randomized trials of non-pharmacological interventions published during 2009 in the six leading general medical journals (n = 138), and which used at least one continuous outcome measure (n = 85). From each trial report, two authors independently extracted the following information about each continuous outcome measure: the reporting of its scoring details, presentation of its results, and the reporting and justification of the clinical significance of the results. RESULTS: Across the 84 trials, we identified 336 continuous outcome measures. A total of 146 (44%) were published measures, 12 (4%) were adapted from published measures, 5 (1%) were developed for the trial, and 173 (51%) were ‘conventional measures’ for which scoring details are not necessary (such as weight). For 57 (35%) of the 163 non-conventional outcome measures no scoring details or reference to the outcome measure were provided in the trial report. Of the 159 outcome measures with a statistically significant result, clinical significance was not mentioned for 81 (51%) and was reported without any elaboration or justification for 39 (25%) of them. CONCLUSIONS: Scoring details of continuous outcome measures used in this sample of randomized trials of non-pharmacological interventions were incompletely reported, which hampers interpretation of a trial’s results. Complete reporting of scoring details is important when considering the clinical significance of the results. When deciding about an intervention, having this information may help clinicians in their conversations with patients about the possible benefits and harms, and their size, of the intervention. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1745-6215-15-362) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4177425
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41774252014-09-29 Cross-sectional analysis of the reporting of continuous outcome measures and clinical significance of results in randomized trials of non-pharmacological interventions Hoffmann, Tammy C Thomas, Sarah T Shin, Paul Ng Hung Glasziou, Paul P Trials Research BACKGROUND: Reporting the scoring details of continuous outcome measures in randomized trials allows readers to interpret the size of any effect of the intervention. This study aimed to determine, in a sample of randomized trials: 1) the completeness of reporting of scoring details for continuous outcome measures, and 2) whether trial authors comment on the clinical significance of statistically significant trial results. METHODS: A descriptive analysis of randomized trials of non-pharmacological interventions published during 2009 in the six leading general medical journals (n = 138), and which used at least one continuous outcome measure (n = 85). From each trial report, two authors independently extracted the following information about each continuous outcome measure: the reporting of its scoring details, presentation of its results, and the reporting and justification of the clinical significance of the results. RESULTS: Across the 84 trials, we identified 336 continuous outcome measures. A total of 146 (44%) were published measures, 12 (4%) were adapted from published measures, 5 (1%) were developed for the trial, and 173 (51%) were ‘conventional measures’ for which scoring details are not necessary (such as weight). For 57 (35%) of the 163 non-conventional outcome measures no scoring details or reference to the outcome measure were provided in the trial report. Of the 159 outcome measures with a statistically significant result, clinical significance was not mentioned for 81 (51%) and was reported without any elaboration or justification for 39 (25%) of them. CONCLUSIONS: Scoring details of continuous outcome measures used in this sample of randomized trials of non-pharmacological interventions were incompletely reported, which hampers interpretation of a trial’s results. Complete reporting of scoring details is important when considering the clinical significance of the results. When deciding about an intervention, having this information may help clinicians in their conversations with patients about the possible benefits and harms, and their size, of the intervention. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1745-6215-15-362) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2014-09-17 /pmc/articles/PMC4177425/ /pubmed/25230673 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-15-362 Text en © Hoffmann et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014 This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Hoffmann, Tammy C
Thomas, Sarah T
Shin, Paul Ng Hung
Glasziou, Paul P
Cross-sectional analysis of the reporting of continuous outcome measures and clinical significance of results in randomized trials of non-pharmacological interventions
title Cross-sectional analysis of the reporting of continuous outcome measures and clinical significance of results in randomized trials of non-pharmacological interventions
title_full Cross-sectional analysis of the reporting of continuous outcome measures and clinical significance of results in randomized trials of non-pharmacological interventions
title_fullStr Cross-sectional analysis of the reporting of continuous outcome measures and clinical significance of results in randomized trials of non-pharmacological interventions
title_full_unstemmed Cross-sectional analysis of the reporting of continuous outcome measures and clinical significance of results in randomized trials of non-pharmacological interventions
title_short Cross-sectional analysis of the reporting of continuous outcome measures and clinical significance of results in randomized trials of non-pharmacological interventions
title_sort cross-sectional analysis of the reporting of continuous outcome measures and clinical significance of results in randomized trials of non-pharmacological interventions
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4177425/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25230673
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-15-362
work_keys_str_mv AT hoffmanntammyc crosssectionalanalysisofthereportingofcontinuousoutcomemeasuresandclinicalsignificanceofresultsinrandomizedtrialsofnonpharmacologicalinterventions
AT thomassaraht crosssectionalanalysisofthereportingofcontinuousoutcomemeasuresandclinicalsignificanceofresultsinrandomizedtrialsofnonpharmacologicalinterventions
AT shinpaulnghung crosssectionalanalysisofthereportingofcontinuousoutcomemeasuresandclinicalsignificanceofresultsinrandomizedtrialsofnonpharmacologicalinterventions
AT glaszioupaulp crosssectionalanalysisofthereportingofcontinuousoutcomemeasuresandclinicalsignificanceofresultsinrandomizedtrialsofnonpharmacologicalinterventions