Cargando…

The critical appraisal of randomized controlled trials published in an Indian journal to assess the quality of reporting: A retrospective, cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND: Although randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the highest levels of evidence, they might not necessarily be of good quality. Hence, RCTs should always be appraised critically. Critical appraisal is the corroboration of evidence by methodically studying its validity, reliability, and a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gupta, Sandeep Kumar, Tiwari, Ravi Kant, Goel, Raj Kumar
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8815670/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35198426
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/picr.PICR_169_19
_version_ 1784645293330923520
author Gupta, Sandeep Kumar
Tiwari, Ravi Kant
Goel, Raj Kumar
author_facet Gupta, Sandeep Kumar
Tiwari, Ravi Kant
Goel, Raj Kumar
author_sort Gupta, Sandeep Kumar
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Although randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the highest levels of evidence, they might not necessarily be of good quality. Hence, RCTs should always be appraised critically. Critical appraisal is the corroboration of evidence by methodically studying its validity, reliability, and applicability. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to do a critical appraisal of the RCTs published in Indian Journal of Pharmacology (IJP) from 2011 to 2016. The secondary objective was to scrutinize how adequately the published RCTs adhere to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) declaration. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present study included all RCTs published as full-text articles in IJP from January 2011 to December 2016. The identified RCTs were critically appraised using the critical appraisal checklist based on CONSORT 2010 guidelines and its extensions. RESULTS: According to this analysis, 75% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.56–0.87) of the articles had given details about the sample size calculation. Nearly 89.29% (95% CI: 0.72–0.96) of the articles described the method for generating random allocation sequence, but only 35.71% (95% CI: 0.20–0.54) of the articles described allocation concealment method. Almost 35.71% (95% CI: 0.20–0.54) of the trials reported results as per the principle of the intention to treat (ITT). Nearly 21.43% (95% CI: 0.10–0.39) of the studies reported CIs in the present study. CONCLUSION: Allocation concealment method, analysis of the data based on the ITT principle, and reporting CIs were found to be underreported in this study. There should be more emphasis on reporting of allocation concealment, ITT analysis, and CI.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8815670
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88156702022-02-22 The critical appraisal of randomized controlled trials published in an Indian journal to assess the quality of reporting: A retrospective, cross-sectional study Gupta, Sandeep Kumar Tiwari, Ravi Kant Goel, Raj Kumar Perspect Clin Res Original Article BACKGROUND: Although randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the highest levels of evidence, they might not necessarily be of good quality. Hence, RCTs should always be appraised critically. Critical appraisal is the corroboration of evidence by methodically studying its validity, reliability, and applicability. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to do a critical appraisal of the RCTs published in Indian Journal of Pharmacology (IJP) from 2011 to 2016. The secondary objective was to scrutinize how adequately the published RCTs adhere to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) declaration. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present study included all RCTs published as full-text articles in IJP from January 2011 to December 2016. The identified RCTs were critically appraised using the critical appraisal checklist based on CONSORT 2010 guidelines and its extensions. RESULTS: According to this analysis, 75% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.56–0.87) of the articles had given details about the sample size calculation. Nearly 89.29% (95% CI: 0.72–0.96) of the articles described the method for generating random allocation sequence, but only 35.71% (95% CI: 0.20–0.54) of the articles described allocation concealment method. Almost 35.71% (95% CI: 0.20–0.54) of the trials reported results as per the principle of the intention to treat (ITT). Nearly 21.43% (95% CI: 0.10–0.39) of the studies reported CIs in the present study. CONCLUSION: Allocation concealment method, analysis of the data based on the ITT principle, and reporting CIs were found to be underreported in this study. There should be more emphasis on reporting of allocation concealment, ITT analysis, and CI. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2022 2021-01-08 /pmc/articles/PMC8815670/ /pubmed/35198426 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/picr.PICR_169_19 Text en Copyright: © 2022 Perspectives in Clinical Research https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Gupta, Sandeep Kumar
Tiwari, Ravi Kant
Goel, Raj Kumar
The critical appraisal of randomized controlled trials published in an Indian journal to assess the quality of reporting: A retrospective, cross-sectional study
title The critical appraisal of randomized controlled trials published in an Indian journal to assess the quality of reporting: A retrospective, cross-sectional study
title_full The critical appraisal of randomized controlled trials published in an Indian journal to assess the quality of reporting: A retrospective, cross-sectional study
title_fullStr The critical appraisal of randomized controlled trials published in an Indian journal to assess the quality of reporting: A retrospective, cross-sectional study
title_full_unstemmed The critical appraisal of randomized controlled trials published in an Indian journal to assess the quality of reporting: A retrospective, cross-sectional study
title_short The critical appraisal of randomized controlled trials published in an Indian journal to assess the quality of reporting: A retrospective, cross-sectional study
title_sort critical appraisal of randomized controlled trials published in an indian journal to assess the quality of reporting: a retrospective, cross-sectional study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8815670/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35198426
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/picr.PICR_169_19
work_keys_str_mv AT guptasandeepkumar thecriticalappraisalofrandomizedcontrolledtrialspublishedinanindianjournaltoassessthequalityofreportingaretrospectivecrosssectionalstudy
AT tiwariravikant thecriticalappraisalofrandomizedcontrolledtrialspublishedinanindianjournaltoassessthequalityofreportingaretrospectivecrosssectionalstudy
AT goelrajkumar thecriticalappraisalofrandomizedcontrolledtrialspublishedinanindianjournaltoassessthequalityofreportingaretrospectivecrosssectionalstudy
AT guptasandeepkumar criticalappraisalofrandomizedcontrolledtrialspublishedinanindianjournaltoassessthequalityofreportingaretrospectivecrosssectionalstudy
AT tiwariravikant criticalappraisalofrandomizedcontrolledtrialspublishedinanindianjournaltoassessthequalityofreportingaretrospectivecrosssectionalstudy
AT goelrajkumar criticalappraisalofrandomizedcontrolledtrialspublishedinanindianjournaltoassessthequalityofreportingaretrospectivecrosssectionalstudy