Does the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials? A systematic review
Top Cited Papers
- 4 September 2006
- journal article
- review article
- Published by AMPCo in The Medical Journal of Australia
- Vol. 185 (5), 263-267
- https://doi.org/10.5694/j.1326-5377.2006.tb00557.x
Abstract
Objective: To determine whether the adoption of the CONSORT checklist is associated with improvement in the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Data sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and reference lists of included studies and of experts were searched to identify eligible studies published between 1996 and 2005. Study selection: Studies were eligible if they (a) compared CONSORT‐adopting and non‐adopting journals after the publication of CONSORT, (b) compared CONSORT adopters before and after publication of CONSORT, or (c) a combination of (a) and (b). Outcomes examined included reports for any of the 22 items on the CONSORT checklist or overall trial quality. Data synthesis: 1128 studies were retrieved, of which 248 were considered possibly relevant. Eight studies were included in the review. CONSORT adopters had significantly better reporting of the method of sequence generation (risk ratio [RR], 1.67; 95% CI, 1.19–2.33), allocation concealment (RR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.37–2.00) and overall number of CONSORT items than non‐adopters (standardised mean difference, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.46–1.19). CONSORT adoption had less effect on reporting of participant flow (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.89–1.46) and blinding of participants (RR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.84–1.43) or data analysts (RR, 5.44; 95% CI, 0.73–36.87). In studies examining CONSORT‐adopting journals before and after the publication of CONSORT, description of the method of sequence generation (RR, 2.78; 95% CI, 1.78–4.33), participant flow (RR, 8.06; 95% CI, 4.10–15.83), and total CONSORT items (standardised mean difference, 3.67 items; 95% CI, 2.09–5.25) were improved after adoption of CONSORT by the journal. Conclusions: Journal adoption of CONSORT is associated with improved reporting of RCTs.Keywords
This publication has 25 references indexed in Scilit:
- Has CONSORT improved the reporting of randomized controlled trials in the palliative care literature? A systematic reviewPalliative Medicine, 2004
- The reporting of methodological factors in randomized controlled trials and the association with a journal policy to promote adherence to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklistControlled Clinical Trials, 2002
- APPLICATION OF THE CONSOLIDATED STANDARDS OF REPORTING TRIALS (CONSORT) IN THE FRACTURE CARE LITERATUREJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 2002
- Use of the CONSORT Statement and Quality of Reports of Randomized TrialsJAMA, 2001
- The CONSORT Statement: Revised Recommendations for Improving the Quality of Reports of Parallel-Group Randomized TrialsJAMA, 2001
- Intention to treat analysis is related to methodological qualityBMJ, 2000
- What is meant by intention to treat analysis? Survey of published randomised controlled trialsBMJ, 1999
- Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses?The Lancet, 1998
- Improving the Quality of Reporting of Randomized Controlled TrialsJAMA, 1996
- Empirical Evidence of BiasJAMA, 1995