Cargando…

Are published randomized clinical trials abstracts on periodontics reported adequately?

INTRODUCTION: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) remain the golden standard in biomedical research, which makes their reporting to a high quality essential to control RCTs’ internal validity. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the quality of abstract reporting of RCTs published in periodontic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Alharbi, Fahad, Almutairi, Abdullah
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7588865/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33134603
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2020.100656
_version_ 1783600450706079744
author Alharbi, Fahad
Almutairi, Abdullah
author_facet Alharbi, Fahad
Almutairi, Abdullah
author_sort Alharbi, Fahad
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) remain the golden standard in biomedical research, which makes their reporting to a high quality essential to control RCTs’ internal validity. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the quality of abstract reporting of RCTs published in periodontic journals and their compliance with the CONSORT guidelines. METHODS: A hand search was undertaken to identify RCTs published in three periodontic journals [1] Journal of periodontology (JOP) [2], the Journal of periodontal research (JOPR) and [3] the Journal of clinical periodontology (JOCP) from 2015 to 2018.The completeness of abstract reporting was evaluated with a modified CONSORT for abstracts statement checklist. RESULTS: Abstracts of 177 randomized controlled trials were identified and assessed. The distribution of published reports was in the Journal of periodontology (JOP), (42%) the Journal of periodontal research (JOPR) (7%) and the Journal of clinical periodontology (JOCP) (51%). The mean overall reporting quality score was 49.0%(95% CI: 47.7–50.2%). Most of the abstracts (91–100%) clearly reported and described the study design as randomized in the RCTs' title and recruitment status, as well as study interventions, objective(s), outcome(s) and conclusions. There was insufficient description and reporting of the authors’ contact details, trial design, method of randomization, blinding, number of analyzed participants per group, harms, trial registration and source of funding. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of reporting of abstracts of randomized controlled trials in periodontic journals is suboptimal. In view of the current guidelines of reporting RCTs abstracts, efforts should be made to better reporting.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7588865
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75888652020-10-30 Are published randomized clinical trials abstracts on periodontics reported adequately? Alharbi, Fahad Almutairi, Abdullah Contemp Clin Trials Commun Article INTRODUCTION: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) remain the golden standard in biomedical research, which makes their reporting to a high quality essential to control RCTs’ internal validity. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the quality of abstract reporting of RCTs published in periodontic journals and their compliance with the CONSORT guidelines. METHODS: A hand search was undertaken to identify RCTs published in three periodontic journals [1] Journal of periodontology (JOP) [2], the Journal of periodontal research (JOPR) and [3] the Journal of clinical periodontology (JOCP) from 2015 to 2018.The completeness of abstract reporting was evaluated with a modified CONSORT for abstracts statement checklist. RESULTS: Abstracts of 177 randomized controlled trials were identified and assessed. The distribution of published reports was in the Journal of periodontology (JOP), (42%) the Journal of periodontal research (JOPR) (7%) and the Journal of clinical periodontology (JOCP) (51%). The mean overall reporting quality score was 49.0%(95% CI: 47.7–50.2%). Most of the abstracts (91–100%) clearly reported and described the study design as randomized in the RCTs' title and recruitment status, as well as study interventions, objective(s), outcome(s) and conclusions. There was insufficient description and reporting of the authors’ contact details, trial design, method of randomization, blinding, number of analyzed participants per group, harms, trial registration and source of funding. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of reporting of abstracts of randomized controlled trials in periodontic journals is suboptimal. In view of the current guidelines of reporting RCTs abstracts, efforts should be made to better reporting. Elsevier 2020-10-16 /pmc/articles/PMC7588865/ /pubmed/33134603 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2020.100656 Text en © 2020 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Alharbi, Fahad
Almutairi, Abdullah
Are published randomized clinical trials abstracts on periodontics reported adequately?
title Are published randomized clinical trials abstracts on periodontics reported adequately?
title_full Are published randomized clinical trials abstracts on periodontics reported adequately?
title_fullStr Are published randomized clinical trials abstracts on periodontics reported adequately?
title_full_unstemmed Are published randomized clinical trials abstracts on periodontics reported adequately?
title_short Are published randomized clinical trials abstracts on periodontics reported adequately?
title_sort are published randomized clinical trials abstracts on periodontics reported adequately?
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7588865/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33134603
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2020.100656
work_keys_str_mv AT alharbifahad arepublishedrandomizedclinicaltrialsabstractsonperiodonticsreportedadequately
AT almutairiabdullah arepublishedrandomizedclinicaltrialsabstractsonperiodonticsreportedadequately