Cargando…

Reporting Quality of Journal Abstracts for Surgical Randomized Controlled Trials Before and After the Implementation of the CONSORT Extension for Abstracts

BACKGROUND: Adequate reporting is crucial in full-text publications but even more so in abstracts because they are the most frequently read part of a publication. In 2008, an extension for abstracts of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT-A) statement was published, defining which...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Speich, Benjamin, Mc Cord, Kimberly A., Agarwal, Arnav, Gloy, Viktoria, Gryaznov, Dmitry, Moffa, Giusi, Hopewell, Sally, Briel, Matthias
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6722149/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31222645
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-019-05064-1
_version_ 1783448474497318912
author Speich, Benjamin
Mc Cord, Kimberly A.
Agarwal, Arnav
Gloy, Viktoria
Gryaznov, Dmitry
Moffa, Giusi
Hopewell, Sally
Briel, Matthias
author_facet Speich, Benjamin
Mc Cord, Kimberly A.
Agarwal, Arnav
Gloy, Viktoria
Gryaznov, Dmitry
Moffa, Giusi
Hopewell, Sally
Briel, Matthias
author_sort Speich, Benjamin
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Adequate reporting is crucial in full-text publications but even more so in abstracts because they are the most frequently read part of a publication. In 2008, an extension for abstracts of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT-A) statement was published, defining which items should be reported in abstracts of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Therefore, we compared the adherence of RCT abstracts to CONSORT-A before and after the publication of CONSORT-A. METHODS: RCTs published in the five surgical journals with the highest impact factor were identified through PubMed for 2005–2007 and 2014–2016. Adherence to 15 CONSORT-A items and two additional items for abstracts of non-pharmacological trials was assessed in duplicate. We compared the overall adherence to CONSORT-A between the two time periods using an unpaired t test and explored adherence to specific items. RESULTS: A total of 192 and 164 surgical RCT abstracts were assessed (2005–2007 and 2014–2016, respectively). In the pre-CONSORT-A phase, the mean score of adequately reported items was 6.14 (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.90–6.38) and 8.11 in the post-CONSORT-A phase (95% CI 7.83–8.39; mean difference 1.97, 95% CI 1.60–2.34; p < 0.0001). The comparison of individual items indicated a significant improvement in 9 of the 15 items. The three least reported items in the post-CONSORT-A phase were randomization (2.4%), blinding (13.4%), and funding (0.0%). Specific items for non-pharmacological trials were rarely reported (approximately 10%). CONCLUSION: The reporting in abstracts of surgical RCTs has improved after the implementation of CONSORT-A. More importantly, there is still ample room for improvement. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00268-019-05064-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6722149
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67221492019-09-19 Reporting Quality of Journal Abstracts for Surgical Randomized Controlled Trials Before and After the Implementation of the CONSORT Extension for Abstracts Speich, Benjamin Mc Cord, Kimberly A. Agarwal, Arnav Gloy, Viktoria Gryaznov, Dmitry Moffa, Giusi Hopewell, Sally Briel, Matthias World J Surg Scientific Review BACKGROUND: Adequate reporting is crucial in full-text publications but even more so in abstracts because they are the most frequently read part of a publication. In 2008, an extension for abstracts of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT-A) statement was published, defining which items should be reported in abstracts of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Therefore, we compared the adherence of RCT abstracts to CONSORT-A before and after the publication of CONSORT-A. METHODS: RCTs published in the five surgical journals with the highest impact factor were identified through PubMed for 2005–2007 and 2014–2016. Adherence to 15 CONSORT-A items and two additional items for abstracts of non-pharmacological trials was assessed in duplicate. We compared the overall adherence to CONSORT-A between the two time periods using an unpaired t test and explored adherence to specific items. RESULTS: A total of 192 and 164 surgical RCT abstracts were assessed (2005–2007 and 2014–2016, respectively). In the pre-CONSORT-A phase, the mean score of adequately reported items was 6.14 (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.90–6.38) and 8.11 in the post-CONSORT-A phase (95% CI 7.83–8.39; mean difference 1.97, 95% CI 1.60–2.34; p < 0.0001). The comparison of individual items indicated a significant improvement in 9 of the 15 items. The three least reported items in the post-CONSORT-A phase were randomization (2.4%), blinding (13.4%), and funding (0.0%). Specific items for non-pharmacological trials were rarely reported (approximately 10%). CONCLUSION: The reporting in abstracts of surgical RCTs has improved after the implementation of CONSORT-A. More importantly, there is still ample room for improvement. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00268-019-05064-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer International Publishing 2019-06-20 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6722149/ /pubmed/31222645 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-019-05064-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 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.
spellingShingle Scientific Review
Speich, Benjamin
Mc Cord, Kimberly A.
Agarwal, Arnav
Gloy, Viktoria
Gryaznov, Dmitry
Moffa, Giusi
Hopewell, Sally
Briel, Matthias
Reporting Quality of Journal Abstracts for Surgical Randomized Controlled Trials Before and After the Implementation of the CONSORT Extension for Abstracts
title Reporting Quality of Journal Abstracts for Surgical Randomized Controlled Trials Before and After the Implementation of the CONSORT Extension for Abstracts
title_full Reporting Quality of Journal Abstracts for Surgical Randomized Controlled Trials Before and After the Implementation of the CONSORT Extension for Abstracts
title_fullStr Reporting Quality of Journal Abstracts for Surgical Randomized Controlled Trials Before and After the Implementation of the CONSORT Extension for Abstracts
title_full_unstemmed Reporting Quality of Journal Abstracts for Surgical Randomized Controlled Trials Before and After the Implementation of the CONSORT Extension for Abstracts
title_short Reporting Quality of Journal Abstracts for Surgical Randomized Controlled Trials Before and After the Implementation of the CONSORT Extension for Abstracts
title_sort reporting quality of journal abstracts for surgical randomized controlled trials before and after the implementation of the consort extension for abstracts
topic Scientific Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6722149/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31222645
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-019-05064-1
work_keys_str_mv AT speichbenjamin reportingqualityofjournalabstractsforsurgicalrandomizedcontrolledtrialsbeforeandaftertheimplementationoftheconsortextensionforabstracts
AT mccordkimberlya reportingqualityofjournalabstractsforsurgicalrandomizedcontrolledtrialsbeforeandaftertheimplementationoftheconsortextensionforabstracts
AT agarwalarnav reportingqualityofjournalabstractsforsurgicalrandomizedcontrolledtrialsbeforeandaftertheimplementationoftheconsortextensionforabstracts
AT gloyviktoria reportingqualityofjournalabstractsforsurgicalrandomizedcontrolledtrialsbeforeandaftertheimplementationoftheconsortextensionforabstracts
AT gryaznovdmitry reportingqualityofjournalabstractsforsurgicalrandomizedcontrolledtrialsbeforeandaftertheimplementationoftheconsortextensionforabstracts
AT moffagiusi reportingqualityofjournalabstractsforsurgicalrandomizedcontrolledtrialsbeforeandaftertheimplementationoftheconsortextensionforabstracts
AT hopewellsally reportingqualityofjournalabstractsforsurgicalrandomizedcontrolledtrialsbeforeandaftertheimplementationoftheconsortextensionforabstracts
AT brielmatthias reportingqualityofjournalabstractsforsurgicalrandomizedcontrolledtrialsbeforeandaftertheimplementationoftheconsortextensionforabstracts