A systematic review of trends in the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials in various research fields

Falagas, Matthew E.; Grigori, Tatiana; Ioannidou, Eleni

doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.07.012

Cited by 44 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Randomization, allocation concealment, and withdrawals were also not properly undertaken or described. These findings are consistent with those reported for some rehabilitation trials [7] and for various stroke therapy trials [5]. The comparability of groups at baseline, the potential for adverse events, or problems with contamination and cointervention were not evaluated in the primary studies included in most reviews.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

“…The findings of the aforementioned review and study were limited by the short interval of time searched (2 months of literature in 2006) [7]; the other study evaluated only allocation concealment criteria for risk of bias [5]. There is a need to evaluate some of these limitations for better assessment of the methodological quality of the literature on stroke rehabilitation therapies.…”

Section: What Is the Implication What Should Now Change?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One such systematic review evaluated the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in differing research fields; this review showed a trend across almost all fields toward improvement in quality, particularly in the areas of allocation concealment and blinding. However, the three studies in the field of rehabilitation showed no upward trend in overall quality improvement [7]. A recent study evaluated the degree to which RCTs in What is new?…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Systematic reviews identify important methodological flaws in stroke rehabilitation therapy primary studies: review of reviews

Santaguida

Oremus

Walker

et al. 2012

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

Section: What Is the Implication What Should Now Change?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Systematic reviews identify important methodological flaws in stroke rehabilitation therapy primary studies: review of reviews

Santaguida

Oremus

Walker

et al. 2012

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…adults, reviewed by Falagas et al [25] and Levin and Palmer [26]. Other authors emphasized the problem of under-reporting [27,28].…”

Section: Publishing Clinical Trials-benefit To Othersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk and benefit from clinical trials in minors: Making the case for transparent and consistent publications

Henschel¹,

Rothenberger²,

Schrey³

et al. 2013

OJPed

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Unfortunately, as to the quality of clinical trials and their publications in minors little is known. Therefore, we assessed published reports of randomized, controlled clinical trials in minors, focusing on a common disease (asthma) and a defined spectrum of lifethreatening diseases (malignant diseases). Method: In an exploratory design, we scanned the publications for methodological aspects as well as indicators of ethical soundness, e.g., statements that informed consent had been obtained before the start of the trial or that a Data and Safety Monitoring Board ensured the patients' safety during the trial. We also looked for passages reflecting the debate on equipoise or other forms of weighing risks and benefits. Results: We found that many of these aspects, which according to the scientific literature and generally acknowledged guidelines are essential to ensure good-quality trials and trial reports, were not considered in the publications analyzed. Conclusion: Therefore, we call for a more transparent and consistent presentation of the trials, especially of safety aspects, relying on a more critical and transparent ethical reflection.

show abstract

“…In den letzten 10 Jahren wurde die Publikationsqualität von RCTs in mehreren klinischen Disziplinen untersucht [31,4,10,3]. Auf dem Gebiet der Psychiatrie liegen hierzu jedoch nur sehr begrenzt Aussagen vor.…”

Section: Hintergrund Und Fragestellungunclassified

„Quality of reporting“ in Studien zur bipolaren Störung

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A systematic review of trends in the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials in various research fields

Cited by 44 publications

References 41 publications

Systematic reviews identify important methodological flaws in stroke rehabilitation therapy primary studies: review of reviews

Systematic reviews identify important methodological flaws in stroke rehabilitation therapy primary studies: review of reviews

Risk and benefit from clinical trials in minors: Making the case for transparent and consistent publications

„Quality of reporting“ in Studien zur bipolaren Störung

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About