Literature DB >> 11304106

The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials.

D Moher1, K F Schulz, D G Altman.   

Abstract

To comprehend the results of a randomized, controlled trial (RCT), readers must understand its design, conduct, analysis, and interpretation. That goal can be achieved only through complete transparency from authors. Despite several decades of educational efforts, the reporting of RCTs needs improvement. Investigators and editors developed the original CONSORT (Con solidated S tandards o f R eporting T rials) statement to help authors improve reporting by using a checklist and flow diagram. The revised CONSORT statement presented in this paper incorporates new evidence and addresses some criticisms of the original statement. The checklist items pertain to the content of the Title, Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion. The revised checklist includes 22 items selected because empirical evidence indicates that not reporting the information is associated with biased estimates of treatment effect or because the information is essential to judge the reliability or relevance of the findings. We intended the flow diagram to depict the passage of participants through an RCT. The revised flow diagram depicts information from four stages of a trial (enrollment, intervention allocation, follow-up, and analysis). The diagram explicitly includes the number of participants, for each intervention group, that are included in the primary data analysis. Inclusion of these numbers allows the reader to judge whether the authors have performed an intention-to-treat analysis. In sum, the CONSORT statement is intended to improve the reporting of an RCT, enabling readers to understand a trial's conduct and to assess the validity of its results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11304106     DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-134-8-200104170-00011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Intern Med        ISSN: 0003-4819            Impact factor:   25.391


  268 in total

1.  How well is the clinical importance of study results reported? An assessment of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  K B Chan; M Man-Son-Hing; F J Molnar; A Laupacis
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2001-10-30       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 2.  Systematic reviews in health care: Investigating and dealing with publication and other biases in meta-analysis.

Authors:  J A Sterne; M Egger; G D Smith
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-07-14

3.  Reports of reports: how good are secondary publications in medicine?

Authors:  F Davidoff
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2001-05-29       Impact factor: 8.262

4.  Better standards for better reporting of RCTs.

Authors:  P M Bossuyt
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-06-02

Review 5.  The revised CONSORT statement: honing the cutting edge of the randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  S Shapiro
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2001-04-17       Impact factor: 8.262

6.  Reporting the clinical importance of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  David Moher; Douglas G Altman; Kenneth F Schulz
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2002-03-19       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 7.  Determination of the clinical importance of study results.

Authors:  Malcolm Man-Son-Hing; Andreas Laupacis; Keith O'Rourke; Frank J Molnar; Jeffery Mahon; Karen B Y Chan; George Wells
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 8.  [Graduated compression stockings in surgery -- optional or obligatory?].

Authors:  Gabriele Meyer; R Gellert; G Schlömer; I Mühlhauser
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2003-11-12       Impact factor: 0.955

9.  Potential solutions to the problem of conducting systematic reviews of new health technologies.

Authors:  David Moher; Howard M Schachter
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2002-06-25       Impact factor: 8.262

10.  Statistical considerations for use of composite health-related quality-of-life scores in randomized trials.

Authors:  Andrew J Vickers
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 4.147

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.