Reporting quality of randomized, controlled trials evaluating immunotherapy in lung cancer

Du, Jun; Zhang, Yundi; Dong, Yingyue; Duan, Jianchun; Bai, Hua; Wang, Jie; Xu, Jiachen; Wang, Zhijie

doi:10.1111/1759-7714.14114

Cited by 3 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some items (e.g., implementation of blinding) are more important in the overall quality of an RCT than others (e.g., the structure of the summary). Although there is now a consensus to use different weights for different items in the CONSORT statement for evaluating the quality of RCTs, there is still a lack of research in this area (Du et al, 2021; Magin et al, 2013). Some reports on RCT quality have attempted to evaluate the weights with reference to total RCT score, but these attempts are not supported by strong evidence.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All finally selected RCTs were evaluated for quality according to the 2010 CONSORT statement (Lai et al, 2006; Schulz et al, 2010; Toulmonde et al, 2011). This statement includes 28 items in total, and the overall quality score (OQS) generated provides a measure of RCT quality (Du et al, 2021). Since some items in the 2010 CONSORT statement are not suitable for evaluating the effectiveness of PBL teaching, these items were excluded in the discussion section (Lai et al, 2006) in accordance with the revised CONSORT statement (Dwan et al, 2019; Juszczak et al, 2019).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Any disagreement between the two researchers was debated until consensus was reached. Thus, the OQS comprised a range of possible scores between 0 and 28 (Du et al, 2021). Some key methodological factors, blindness and randomization, were also evaluated in detail.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Cross‐sectional study of the quality of randomized control trials on problem‐based learning in medical education

Zhang

Liu

et al. 2022

Clinical Anatomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Problem-based learning (PBL) is increasingly being used in medical education globally, but its effectiveness in teaching remains controversial. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) is the method of choice for evaluating its effectiveness. The quality of an RCT has a significant effect on this evaluation, but to date we have not seen an assessment of the quality of RCTs for PBL. Two researchers searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for RCTs addressing PBL in medical education. The overall quality of each report was measured on a 28-point overall quality score (OQS) based on the 2010 revised Comprehensive Standards for Reporting and Testing (CONSORT) Statement.Furthermore, to study the key factors affecting OQS more effectively, a linear regression model of those factors was established using SPSS. After literature screening, 30 RCTs were eventually included and analyzed. The median OQS was 15 (range, 7-20), which meant that half of the items in the revised 2010 CONSORT statement were poorly reported in at least 40% of the RCTs analyzed. The regression model showed that the year of publication of RCTs and the impact factors of the journals in which they were published were the main factors affecting OQS. The overall quality of reporting of RCTs on PBL teaching in medical education was not satisfactory. Some RCTs were subjectively selective in reporting certain items, leading to heterogeneity in quality. It is expected that statisticians will develop new standards more suitable for evaluating RCTs related to teaching research and that editors and peer reviewers will be required to review the relevant RCTs more strictly.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cross‐sectional study of the quality of randomized control trials on problem‐based learning in medical education

Zhang

Liu

et al. 2022

Clinical Anatomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[22,25] To compensate for this, we modified the CONSORT Checklist from 37 to 28 items and investigated the reporting of certain important issues in detail (Tables 1-3). [21,31] Our study has several implications. First, we identified areas for improvement in the quality of reporting of randomized control trials (RCTs) concerning PAs pharmacotherapy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…The average OQS score in 2010 was 17.89 (range, 7.5–24.5). [ 21 ] Beneki et al showed that the quality of reporting according to the CONSORT statement of most RCTs comparing anticoagulant vs antiplatelet medication for Venous Thromboembolism prophylaxis is low. Most items concerning methodological issues were reported by <50% of the studies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in pharmacotherapy for pituitary adenomas

Yan,

Wang,

Zhao

et al. 2024

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Medical therapy has become an increasingly important intervention owing to improvements in the multidisciplinary care for pituitary adenomas (PAs). This study aimed to assess the reporting quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on PAs pharmacotherapy. Methods: RCTs evaluating the efficacy of pharmacotherapy in PAs published in English between January 1, 1974, and December 31, 2022, were searched for and collected from PubMed and MEDLINE. The 2010 Consolidated Standards for Test Reports (CONSORT) statement-based 28 items overall quality score (OQS) was used to evaluate the overall quality of each report. Results: Twenty-seven related RCTs including 1816 patients were retrieved. The median OQS score was 12 (range, 6–19) on a scale of 0 to 28. Important items, such as background, objectives, participants, interventions, and outcomes, were sufficiently reported in 100% (27/27) of the articles. Statistical methods were adequately described in 93% (25/27) of patients. However, RCTs underreported identification as randomized trials in the title (3/27, 11%), sample size, allocation concealment, implementation, ancillary analysis method, and Diagram and Ancillary analyses (1/27, 4%). The OQS of published RCTs has significantly increased since 2010 (P = .012). The multivariate final model showed significant associations between higher OQS and publication since 2010 and enrollment of more than 100 patients. Conclusions: The overall reporting quality of RCTs on pharmacotherapy in PAs was poor, based on the 2010 CONSORT statement. However, we noticed an improvement in the OQS over the years and identified the factors associated with a better report. Increased effort is necessary to raise awareness of these issues among writers, readers, reviewers, and editors.

show abstract

The Deficits of the Methodological and Reporting Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials in the Field of Prosthetics and Orthotics in Iran: A Systematic Review

Shahabi

Kiekens

Mojgani

et al. 2023

RRCT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Due to the development of the academic field of prosthetics and orthotics (P&O) in recent years, scientific studies in this domain have increased. However, relevant published studies, especially randomized controlled trials (RCTs), are not always of acceptable quality. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the methodological and reporting quality of RCTs in the field of P&O in Iran to recognize existing shortcomings. Methods: Six electronic databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database, were searched from January 1, 2000, to July 15, 2022. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was applied to evaluate the methodological quality of the included studies. In addition, the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2010 checklist was used to assess the reporting quality of the included studies. Results: 35 RCTs published from 2007 to 2021 were included in our final analysis. The methodological quality of 18 RCTs was poor, and the quality of the rest of the studies was good (n=7) or fair (n= 10). In addition, the median score (IQR) of the reporting quality of RCTs in accordance with the CONSORT items was 18 (13-24.5) out of 35. The results of the relationship analysis indicated a moderate correlation between the CONSORT score and the publication year of the included RCTs. Nonetheless, there was a low correlation between CONSORT scores and journals' impact factors. Conclusion: The overall methodological and reporting quality of RCTs in the field of P&O in Iran was not found to be optimal. To enhance the methodological quality, some items should be considered more strictly, such as blinding of outcome assessment, allocation concealment, and random sequence generation. Furthermore, the criteria of CONSORT, as reporting quality checklist, should be adapted in writing the papers, especially methods-related items.

show abstract

Reporting quality of randomized, controlled trials evaluating immunotherapy in lung cancer

Cited by 3 publications

References 54 publications

Cross‐sectional study of the quality of randomized control trials on problem‐based learning in medical education

Cross‐sectional study of the quality of randomized control trials on problem‐based learning in medical education

The reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in pharmacotherapy for pituitary adenomas

The Deficits of the Methodological and Reporting Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials in the Field of Prosthetics and Orthotics in Iran: A Systematic Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About