Case reports describing treatments in the emergency medicine literature: missing and misleading information
Open Access
- 15 June 2009
- journal article
- other
- Published by Springer Science and Business Media LLC in BMC Emergency Medicine
- Vol. 9 (1), 10-7
- https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-227x-9-10
Abstract
Background Although randomized trials and systematic reviews provide the "best evidence" for guiding medical practice, many emergency medicine journals still publish case reports (CRs). The quality of the reporting in these publications has not been assessed. Objectives In this study we sought to determine the proportion of treatment-related case reports that adequately reported information about the patient, disease, interventions, co-interventions, outcomes and other critical information. Methods We identified CRs published in 4 emergency medicine journals in 2000–2005 and categorized them according to their purpose (disease description, overdose or adverse drug reactioin, diagnostic test or treatment effect). Treatment-related CRs were reviewed for the presence or absence of 11 reporting elements. Results All told, 1,316 CRs were identified; of these, 85 (6.5%; 95CI = 66, 84) were about medical or surgical treatments. Most contained adequate descriptions of the patient (99%; 95CI = 95, 100), the stage and severity of the patient's disease (88%; 95CI = 79, 93), the intervention (80%; 95CI = 70, 87) and the outcomes of treatment (90%; 95CI = 82, 95). Fewer CRs reported the patient's co-morbidities (45%; 95CI = 35, 56), concurrent medications (30%; 95CI = 21, 40) or co-interventions (57%; 95CI = 46, 67) or mentioned any possible treatment side-effects (33%; 95CI = 24, 44). Only 37% (95CI = 19, 38) discussed alternative explanations for favorable outcomes. Generalizability of treatment effects to other patients was mentioned in only 29% (95CI = 20, 39). Just 2 CRs (2.3%; 95CI = 1, 8) reported a 'denominator" (number of patients subjected to the same intervention, whether or not successful. Conclusion Treatment-related CRs in emergency medicine journals often omit critical details about treatments, co-interventions, outcomes, generalizability, causality and denominators. As a result, the information may be misleading to providers, and the clinical applications may be detrimental to patient care.Keywords
This publication has 33 references indexed in Scilit:
- Anecdotes as evidenceBMJ, 2003
- Lionfish envenomationThe Journal of Emergency Medicine, 2002
- Termination of acute wide QRS complex atrial fibrillation with ibutilideThe American Journal of Emergency Medicine, 2000
- Recommendations for reporting cost-effectiveness analyses. Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and MedicineJAMA, 1996
- Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statementJAMA, 1996
- The Series of Consecutive Cases as a Device for Assessing Outcomes of InterventionThe New England Journal of Medicine, 1984
- Validity of anecdotal reports of suspected adverse drug reactions: the problem of false alarmsBMJ, 1982
- Response of recurrent sustained ventricular tachycardia to verapamil.Heart, 1981
- PULMONARY EMBOLISMThe Lancet, 1961
- Studies of Local Gastric Cooling as Related to Peptic UlcerAnnals of Surgery, 1959