Reported quality of randomized controlled trials of physiotherapy interventions has improved over time

Moseley, Anne M.; Herbert, Robert D.; Maher, Christopher G.; Sherrington, Catherine; Elkins, Mark R.

doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.08.009

Cited by 101 publications

(86 citation statements)

References 34 publications

(52 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…1 The quality and reporting of trials are moderate, on average, ranging from poor to excellent. 2 This wide variability in trial quality poses a barrier to physical therapists hoping to interpret and use high-quality research to guide the teaching and practice of physical therapy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Quality and Reporting of Randomized Trials in Cardiothoracic Physical Therapy Could Be Substantially Improved

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: While the number of reports of randomized controlled trials in physical therapy has increased substantially in the last decades, the quality and reporting of randomized trials have never been systematically investigated in the subdiscipline of cardiothoracic physical therapy. The primary aim was to determine the methodological quality and completeness of reporting of cardiothoracic physical therapy trials. Secondary aims were to investigate the range of clinical conditions investigated in these trials and the degree of association between trial characteristics and quality. METHODS: All reports of randomized trials indexed on the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) and coded as being relevant to cardiothoracic physical therapy were surveyed. PEDro scale individual items and total score were downloaded, and some characteristics included in the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement were extracted for each trial report. RESULTS: The mean ؎ SD total PEDro score for the 2,970 included reports of cardiothoracic trials was 4.7 ؎ 1.4, with 27% being of moderate to high quality. The clinical conditions studied included chronic lung diseases (32% of the trials), cardiac diseases (20%), cardiovascular surgical conditions (5%), sleep disorders (5%), peripheral vascular disease (4%), acute lung disease (4%), critical illness (3%), and other surgical conditions (3%). The multivariate linear regression analysis revealed that endorsement of the CONSORT statement by the publishing journal, time since publication, evidence of trial registration, sources of funding, description of the sample size calculation, and identification of the primary outcome(s) had associations with the total PEDro score. CONCLUSIONS: There is great potential to improve the quality of the conduct and reporting of trials evaluating the effects of cardiothoracic physical therapy.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1,13 A survey of the trials in cardiothoracic physical therapy could be used to describe the overall quality of trials as well as to determine whether some trial characteristics are associated with higher quality.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Quality and Reporting of Randomized Trials in Cardiothoracic Physical Therapy Could Be Substantially Improved

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…4 The quality of reports of RCTs of physiotherapy interventions varies according to the year of publication, the language of publication, and whether the intervention being assessed is a type of electrotherapy. 5,6 An analysis of 10,025 physiotherapy trial reports that were rated for methodological quality using the 10-point PEDro scale 7 found that total PEDro score increased by an average of 0.06 points per year (or 0.6 points per decade). 5 An analysis of 13,392 trial reports, which adjusted for the year of publication, revealed that publication in English increased the total PEDro score by an average of 0.15 points over publication in languages other than English.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Quality of Reports of Randomized Controlled Trials Varies between Subdisciplines of Physiotherapy

Moseley

Elkins

Janer-Duncan

et al. 2014

Physiotherapy Canada

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The quality of reports of randomized trials of physiotherapy interventions varies by year of publication, language of publication and whether the intervention being assessed is a type of electrotherapy. Whether it also varies by subdiscipline of physiotherapy has not yet been systematically investigated. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the quality of trial reports varies according to the subdiscipline of physiotherapy being evaluated. Methods: Reports of physiotherapy trials were identified using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro). Quality of the trial report was evaluated using the PEDro scale (total PEDro score and 11 individual PEDro scale items). Multiple linear and logistic regressions were used to predict the quality of trial reports, with subdisciplines, time since publication, language of publication, and evaluation of electrotherapy as independent variables in the model. Results: Total PEDro scores are higher when trial reports are more recent; are published in English; investigate electrotherapy; and are in the subdisciplines of musculoskeletal, neurology, cardiopulmonary, gerontology, continence and women's health, orthopaedics, or paediatrics. Trials in the subdisciplines of ergonomics and occupational health, oncology, and sports are associated with lower total PEDro scores. The musculoskeletal subdiscipline had a positive association with six of the PEDro scale items, more than any other subdiscipline. Conclusions: There is scope to improve the quality of the conduct and reporting of randomized trials across all the physiotherapy subdisciplines. This study provides specific information about how each physiotherapy subdiscipline can improve trial quality.Key Words: Randomized controlled trials as topic. RÉ SUMÉObjectif: La qualité des rapports sur les essais randomisé s portant sur des interventions en physiothé rapie varie selon l'anné e de publication, la langue de publication et la question de savoir si l'intervention é valué e constitue un type d'é lectrothé rapie. On n'a pas encore cherché systé matiquement à dé terminer si la qualité varie aussi en fonction de la sous-discipline de la physiothé rapie. Cette é tude visait à dé terminer si la qualité des rapports portant sur les essais varie en fonction de la sous-discipline de la physiothé rapie é valué e. Mé thodes: On a trouvé des rapports portant sur des essais en physiothé rapie en utilisant la base de donné es factuelles sur la physiothé rapie (PEDro). On a é valué la qualité du rapport sur l'essai en fonction de l'é chelle PEDro (ré sultat PEDro total et 11 questions individuelles). De multiples ré gressions liné aires et logistiques ont servi à pré dire la qualité des rapports sur les essais et les sous-disciplines, le temps é coulé depuis la publication, la langue de la publication et l'é valuation de l'é lectrothé rapie ont servi de variables indé pendantes dans le modè le. Ré sultats: Les ré sultats PEDro globaux sont plus é levé s lorsque les rapports sur les essais sont plus ré cents; lor...

show abstract

“…Para tal, deve considerar-se a avaliação da qualidade dos estudos primários que nela serão incluídos, recorrendo-se a escalas de avaliação da qualidade metodológica ou a checklists. A importância da utilização deste tipo de ferramentas está descrita na literatura como um incentivo para a melhoria da qualidade da redação dos manuscritos, bem como evidência do rigor associado às metodologias utilizadas nos estudos (Moseley, Herbert, Maher, Sherrington, & Elkins, 2011).…”

Section: Avaliação Da Qualidade Dos Estudosunclassified

Revisões sistemáticas em desporto e saúde: Orientações para o planeamento, elaboração, redação e avaliação

Bento¹

2014

Motricidade

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ARTIGO DE REVISÃO | REVIEW ARTICLE RESUMOSumários da evidência disponível que sejam credíveis são fundamentais para o apoio à tomada de decisão de investigadores e profissionais no desempenho do seu trabalho. Por esta razão, a qualidade do trabalho final deve depender e refletir o rigor aplicado em todas as etapas de elaboração dos trabalhos de revisão. O objetivo do presente trabalho é compilar orientações e recomendações para o planeamento, elaboração e redação de revisões sistemáticas, que sirvam de apoio à melhor consecução do trabalho de investigadores e revisores. Inicialmente situam-se os trabalhos de revisão sistemática no âmbito de outros trabalhos de síntese da literatura, identificando as suas características distintivas. Posteriormente, apresentam-se as etapas de desenvolvimento de trabalhos de revisão sistemática, destacando-se as principais preocupações e cuidados no cumprimento de cada uma. Finalmente, será apresentada uma versão comentada de uma checklist de redação de estudos, que facilite a redação de futuros trabalhos desta natureza. Pretende-se descrever as principais tarefas e preocupações em cada fase de elaboração de revisões sistemáticas no sentido de contribuir para a uniformização da estrutura dos trabalhos bem como da qualidade dos mesmos, de modo a que o conhecimento disponível em sínteses da literatura constitua uma fonte fiável de fundamento para a tomada de decisão. Palavras-chave: revisão sistemática, recomendações, metodologia da investigação, síntese ABSTRACT Reliable summaries of the available evidence are essential to help researchers and practitioners make well-informed decisions. For this reason, the quality of the final result depends on the accuracy in each stage of the development of a systematic review. The aim of the present study is to draw guidelines and recommendations for planning, conducting, reporting and evaluating systematic reviews that support the work of researchers and reviewers. Initially, we address the main characteristics and differences of a systematic review compared to other literature reviews. Then, we describe the main procedures and concerns to be considered in each phase of developing a systematic review. Finally, we present a commented version of a checklist for reporting systematic reviews and guide the reader. We intend to contribute to the set of standards for the structure and quality of knowledge published in review papers, in the fields of Sport and Health, which support more informed decisions.

show abstract

Reported quality of randomized controlled trials of physiotherapy interventions has improved over time

Cited by 101 publications

References 34 publications

The Quality and Reporting of Randomized Trials in Cardiothoracic Physical Therapy Could Be Substantially Improved

The Quality and Reporting of Randomized Trials in Cardiothoracic Physical Therapy Could Be Substantially Improved

The Quality of Reports of Randomized Controlled Trials Varies between Subdisciplines of Physiotherapy

Revisões sistemáticas em desporto e saúde: Orientações para o planeamento, elaboração, redação e avaliação

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About