Randomized Clinical Trials Presented at the World Congress of Endourology: How Is the Quality of Reporting?

Autorino, Riccardo; Borges, Carlos Nazareno Ferreira; White, Michael A.; Altunrende, Fatih; Perdonà, Sisto; Haber, Georges-Pascal; Sio, Marco De; Khanna, Rakesh; Stein, Robert J.; Kaouk, Jihad

doi:10.1089/end.2009.0541

Cited by 21 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…They reported that RCTs quantitatively increased from 1.09% of the original articles in the 1980s to 2.63% in the 2000s and that the Jadad scale increased from one point in the 1980s to 2.17 points in the 2000s. As for quality assessment in urology, Autorino et al extracted RCTs from abstracts presented at the World Congress of Endourology (WCE) annual meeting during 2004-2006 and assessed them according to the Consolidated Standards for the Reporting of Trials (CONSORT) statement [14]. They reported that RCT was described in the title of the abstracts in most cases, that RCTs accounted for a small portion of the total abstracts, and that only a small number of abstracts satisfied the CONSORT criteria.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quality Assessment of Randomized Controlled Trials Published in the Korean Journal of Urology Over the Past 20 Years

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeBecause low-quality trials may lead to erroneous conclusions, quality assessments are necessary. Thus, in this study, we scrutinized randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in the Korean Journal of Urology (KJU) to assess their quantity and quality.Materials and MethodsUpon extracting RCTs from all articles published in the KJU from 1991 to 2010, assessments were made on the basis of the Jadad scale and the adequacy of allocation concealment. The selections and assessments were performed independently by two researchers, and adjustment of the differences was done by a third-party researcher. In addition, the factors that may affect quality were analyzed.ResultsA total of 3,516 original articles were searched and 28 RCTs were extracted. In the 1990s, RCTs constituted only 0.27% of the total original articles, but in the 2000s, RCTs constituted 1.34%. The mean total Jadad score increased from 1.6 points in the 1990s to 1.65 points in the 2000s. However, the percentage of "good quality" trials also increased from 20% to 30.43%. As for adequate allocation concealment, one study was observed in the 2000s. The aspect most lacking was appropriate dropout and double-blinding. Studies with medical interventions or funded or examined by institutional review boards tended to receive higher quality assessments.ConclusionsAlthough RCTs consistently increased in both quantity and quality, in future studies, researchers should continue to strive toward achieving adequate allocation concealment and appropriate double-blinding. In addition, researchers must become more interested in receiving external funding and undergoing examination by institutional review boards.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quality Assessment of Randomized Controlled Trials Published in the Korean Journal of Urology Over the Past 20 Years

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, objective methodological quality assessment of published studies is essential because these studies can influence the quality of medical care received by patients [5]. The methodological quality of an article can represent its overall quality and should therefore be assessed at the design, conduct, and analysis steps [6,7]. In addition, any erroneous data can be identified throughout the assessment process, thereby eliminating the erroneous data from clinical care and saving medical expenses [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Quality of Randomized Controlled Urological Trials Conducted by Korean Medical Institutions

Chung

Lee

2013

Korean J Urol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTo assess the quality of randomized controlled urological trials conducted by Korean medical institutions.Materials and MethodsQuality assessment was conducted by using the Jadad scale; in addition, the van Tulder scale and the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool were used as individual indices. All assessments were performed by two reviewers. If the outcomes differed, the two reviewers and a third reviewer adjusted the discrepancy in the results through discussion. Starting from 1986, a quality analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted in 1-year and 5-year units. The quality assessment was conducted by subject, type of intervention, presence of double blinding, presence of funding, and review by an Institutional Review Board (IRB).ResultsWhereas the number of RCTs published has gradually increased, there was no significant difference in the quality of the RCTs according to publication year. Drug studies, double-blind studies, studies with funding, and studies reviewed by IRBs had higher quality scores and a higher percentage of high-quality RCTs than did other studies. Thirty-six RCTs were published in journals included in the Science Citation Index and 20 RCTs were published in journals included in the Science Citation Index Expanded. The largest number of RCTs (32.32%) were published by the Korean Journal of Urology.ConclusionsA quantitative increase was observed in RCTs over time, but no qualitative improvement in the RCTs was observed. It seems necessary to put effort into the quality improvement of RCTs at the design stage.

show abstract

“…[4] The publication rate varies from 11% to 78%,[6] typically hovering around 30-50%. [7–12] However, there is no data regarding the publication rate of research presented in anesthesia in an Indian scenario.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Presentation of research in anesthesia: Culmination into publication?

Tyagi

Chugh

Kumar

et al. 2013

J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:To assess the quality of research presentations made in conferences, its success or failure to be published in a peer-reviewed journal is a well-accepted marker. However, there is no data regarding the publication of research presentations made in Indian conferences of anesthesiology.Objective:The primary objective was to determine publication rate of research presented at the largest and best attended national conference in anesthesiology, the Indian Society of Anaesthesiologists’ Conference (ISACON), and also compare it with the rate from an international conference American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA annual meeting) held in the same year.Materials and Methods:All 363 abstracts presented as poster or podium presentations at the ISACON, and an equal number of randomly selected abstracts presented at ASA annual meeting were searched on Pubmed and Google Scholar for their full-text publications in peer-reviewed journals using a standardized search strategy. As secondary observations, abstracts were assessed for completeness by noting certain components central to research methodology. Also, changes between abstract of the presentation and published paper were noted with respect to certain components.Results:The publication rate of presentations at ISACON and ASA meetings was 5% and 22%, respectively. The abstracts from ISACON lacked central components of research such as methods and statistical tests. The commonest change in the full-text publications as compared with the original abstract from both conferences was a change in authorship.Conclusion:Steps are required to augment full-text publication of Indian research, including a more rigorous peer review of abstracts submitted to ISACON to ensure their completeness.

show abstract

Randomized Clinical Trials Presented at the World Congress of Endourology: How Is the Quality of Reporting?

Cited by 21 publications

References 18 publications

Quality Assessment of Randomized Controlled Trials Published in the Korean Journal of Urology Over the Past 20 Years

Quality Assessment of Randomized Controlled Trials Published in the Korean Journal of Urology Over the Past 20 Years

Assessing the Quality of Randomized Controlled Urological Trials Conducted by Korean Medical Institutions

Presentation of research in anesthesia: Culmination into publication?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About