Cargando…

Quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials in chiropractic using the CONSORT checklist

BACKGROUND: Reviews indicate that the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the medical literature is less than optimal, poor to moderate, and require improving. However, the reporting quality of chiropractic RCTs is unknown. As a result, the aim of this study was to assess...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Karpouzis, Fay, Bonello, Rod, Pribicevic, Mario, Kalamir, Allan, Brown, Benjamin T.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4899907/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27284400
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12998-016-0099-6
_version_ 1782436551995686912
author Karpouzis, Fay
Bonello, Rod
Pribicevic, Mario
Kalamir, Allan
Brown, Benjamin T.
author_facet Karpouzis, Fay
Bonello, Rod
Pribicevic, Mario
Kalamir, Allan
Brown, Benjamin T.
author_sort Karpouzis, Fay
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Reviews indicate that the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the medical literature is less than optimal, poor to moderate, and require improving. However, the reporting quality of chiropractic RCTs is unknown. As a result, the aim of this study was to assess the reporting quality of chiropractic RCTs and identify factors associated with better reporting quality. We hypothesized that quality of reporting of RCTs was influenced by industry funding, positive findings, larger sample sizes, latter year of publication and publication in non-chiropractic journals. METHODS: RCTs published between 2005 and 2014 were sourced from clinical trial registers, PubMed and the Cochrane Reviews. RCTs were included if they involved high-velocity, low-amplitude (HVLA) spinal and/or extremity manipulation and were conducted by a chiropractor or within a chiropractic department. Data extraction, and reviews were conducted by all authors independently. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. Outcomes: a 39-point overall quality of reporting score checklist was developed based on the CONSORT 2010 and CONSORT for Non-Pharmacological Treatments statements. Four key methodological items, based on allocation concealment, blinding of participants and assessors, and use of intention-to-treat analysis (ITT) were also investigated. RESULTS: Thirty-five RCTs were included. The overall quality of reporting score ranged between 10 and 33 (median score 26.0; IQR = 8.00). Allocation concealment, blinding of participants and assessors and ITT analysis were reported in 31 (87 %), 16 (46 %), 25 (71 %) and 21 (60 %) of the 35 RCTs respectively. Items most underreported were from the CONSORT for Non-Pharmacological Treatments statement. Multivariate regression analysis, revealed that year of publication (t(32) = 5.17, p = 0.000, 95 % CI: 0.76, 1.76), and sample size (t(32) = 3.01, p = 0.005, 95 % CI: 1.36, 7.02), were the only two factors associated with reporting quality. CONCLUSION: The overall quality of reporting RCTs in chiropractic ranged from poor to excellent, improving between 2005 and 2014. This study suggests that quality of reporting, was influenced by year of publication and sample size but not journal type, funding source or outcome positivity. Reporting of some key methodological items and uptake of items from the CONSORT Extension for Non-Pharmacological Treatments items was suboptimal. Future recommendations were made. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12998-016-0099-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4899907
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48999072016-06-10 Quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials in chiropractic using the CONSORT checklist Karpouzis, Fay Bonello, Rod Pribicevic, Mario Kalamir, Allan Brown, Benjamin T. Chiropr Man Therap Research BACKGROUND: Reviews indicate that the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the medical literature is less than optimal, poor to moderate, and require improving. However, the reporting quality of chiropractic RCTs is unknown. As a result, the aim of this study was to assess the reporting quality of chiropractic RCTs and identify factors associated with better reporting quality. We hypothesized that quality of reporting of RCTs was influenced by industry funding, positive findings, larger sample sizes, latter year of publication and publication in non-chiropractic journals. METHODS: RCTs published between 2005 and 2014 were sourced from clinical trial registers, PubMed and the Cochrane Reviews. RCTs were included if they involved high-velocity, low-amplitude (HVLA) spinal and/or extremity manipulation and were conducted by a chiropractor or within a chiropractic department. Data extraction, and reviews were conducted by all authors independently. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. Outcomes: a 39-point overall quality of reporting score checklist was developed based on the CONSORT 2010 and CONSORT for Non-Pharmacological Treatments statements. Four key methodological items, based on allocation concealment, blinding of participants and assessors, and use of intention-to-treat analysis (ITT) were also investigated. RESULTS: Thirty-five RCTs were included. The overall quality of reporting score ranged between 10 and 33 (median score 26.0; IQR = 8.00). Allocation concealment, blinding of participants and assessors and ITT analysis were reported in 31 (87 %), 16 (46 %), 25 (71 %) and 21 (60 %) of the 35 RCTs respectively. Items most underreported were from the CONSORT for Non-Pharmacological Treatments statement. Multivariate regression analysis, revealed that year of publication (t(32) = 5.17, p = 0.000, 95 % CI: 0.76, 1.76), and sample size (t(32) = 3.01, p = 0.005, 95 % CI: 1.36, 7.02), were the only two factors associated with reporting quality. CONCLUSION: The overall quality of reporting RCTs in chiropractic ranged from poor to excellent, improving between 2005 and 2014. This study suggests that quality of reporting, was influenced by year of publication and sample size but not journal type, funding source or outcome positivity. Reporting of some key methodological items and uptake of items from the CONSORT Extension for Non-Pharmacological Treatments items was suboptimal. Future recommendations were made. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12998-016-0099-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-06-09 /pmc/articles/PMC4899907/ /pubmed/27284400 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12998-016-0099-6 Text en © Karpouzis et al. 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. 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
Karpouzis, Fay
Bonello, Rod
Pribicevic, Mario
Kalamir, Allan
Brown, Benjamin T.
Quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials in chiropractic using the CONSORT checklist
title Quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials in chiropractic using the CONSORT checklist
title_full Quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials in chiropractic using the CONSORT checklist
title_fullStr Quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials in chiropractic using the CONSORT checklist
title_full_unstemmed Quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials in chiropractic using the CONSORT checklist
title_short Quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials in chiropractic using the CONSORT checklist
title_sort quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials in chiropractic using the consort checklist
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4899907/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27284400
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12998-016-0099-6
work_keys_str_mv AT karpouzisfay qualityofreportingofrandomisedcontrolledtrialsinchiropracticusingtheconsortchecklist
AT bonellorod qualityofreportingofrandomisedcontrolledtrialsinchiropracticusingtheconsortchecklist
AT pribicevicmario qualityofreportingofrandomisedcontrolledtrialsinchiropracticusingtheconsortchecklist
AT kalamirallan qualityofreportingofrandomisedcontrolledtrialsinchiropracticusingtheconsortchecklist
AT brownbenjamint qualityofreportingofrandomisedcontrolledtrialsinchiropracticusingtheconsortchecklist