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...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
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 |