Katie Witkiewitz1,2, John W Finney3, Alex H S Harris3,4, Daniel R Kivlahan5,6, Henry R Kranzler7,8. 1. Department of Psychology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico. 2. Center on Alcoholism, Substance Abuse, and Addictions, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico. 3. Center for Innovation to Implementation, VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Menlo Park, California. 4. VA Substance Use Disorder Quality Enhancement Research Initiative, VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Menlo Park, California. 5. Veterans Health Administration, Washington, District of Columbia. 6. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. 7. Center for Studies of Addiction, Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 8. VISN4 MIRECC, Philadelphia VAMC, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The primary goals in conducting clinical trials of treatments for alcohol use disorders (AUDs) are to identify efficacious treatments and determine which treatments are most efficacious for which patients. Accurate reporting of study design features and results is imperative to enable readers of research reports to evaluate to what extent a study has achieved these goals. Guidance on quality of clinical trial reporting has evolved substantially over the past 2 decades, primarily through the publication and widespread adoption of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement. However, there is room to improve the adoption of those standards in reporting the design and findings of treatment trials for AUD. METHODS: This paper provides a narrative review of guidance on reporting quality in AUD treatment trials. RESULTS: Despite improvements in the reporting of results of treatment trials for AUD over the past 2 decades, many published reports provide insufficient information on design or methods. CONCLUSIONS: The reporting of alcohol treatment trial design, analysis, and results requires improvement in 4 primary areas: (i) trial registration, (ii) procedures for recruitment and retention, (iii) procedures for randomization and intervention design considerations, and (iv) statistical methods used to assess treatment efficacy. Improvements in these areas and the adoption of reporting standards by authors, reviewers, and editors are critical to an accurate assessment of the reliability and validity of treatment effects. Continued developments in this area are needed to move AUD treatment research forward via systematic reviews and meta-analyses that maximize the utility of completed studies.
BACKGROUND: The primary goals in conducting clinical trials of treatments for alcohol use disorders (AUDs) are to identify efficacious treatments and determine which treatments are most efficacious for which patients. Accurate reporting of study design features and results is imperative to enable readers of research reports to evaluate to what extent a study has achieved these goals. Guidance on quality of clinical trial reporting has evolved substantially over the past 2 decades, primarily through the publication and widespread adoption of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement. However, there is room to improve the adoption of those standards in reporting the design and findings of treatment trials for AUD. METHODS: This paper provides a narrative review of guidance on reporting quality in AUD treatment trials. RESULTS: Despite improvements in the reporting of results of treatment trials for AUD over the past 2 decades, many published reports provide insufficient information on design or methods. CONCLUSIONS: The reporting of alcohol treatment trial design, analysis, and results requires improvement in 4 primary areas: (i) trial registration, (ii) procedures for recruitment and retention, (iii) procedures for randomization and intervention design considerations, and (iv) statistical methods used to assess treatment efficacy. Improvements in these areas and the adoption of reporting standards by authors, reviewers, and editors are critical to an accurate assessment of the reliability and validity of treatment effects. Continued developments in this area are needed to move AUD treatment research forward via systematic reviews and meta-analyses that maximize the utility of completed studies.
Authors: Lesley Wood; Matthias Egger; Lise Lotte Gluud; Kenneth F Schulz; Peter Jüni; Douglas G Altman; Christian Gluud; Richard M Martin; Anthony J G Wood; Jonathan A C Sterne Journal: BMJ Date: 2008-03-03
Authors: Raymond F Anton; Stephanie S O'Malley; Domenic A Ciraulo; Ron A Cisler; David Couper; Dennis M Donovan; David R Gastfriend; James D Hosking; Bankole A Johnson; Joseph S LoCastro; Richard Longabaugh; Barbara J Mason; Margaret E Mattson; William R Miller; Helen M Pettinati; Carrie L Randall; Robert Swift; Roger D Weiss; Lauren D Williams; Allen Zweben Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-05-03 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Lucy Turner; Larissa Shamseer; Douglas G Altman; Laura Weeks; Jodi Peters; Thilo Kober; Sofia Dias; Kenneth F Schulz; Amy C Plint; David Moher Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2012-11-14
Authors: Jalie A Tucker; JeeWon Cheong; Tyler G James; Soyeon Jung; Susan D Chandler Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2020-02-18 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Robert C Schlauch; Cory A Crane; Gerard J Connors; Ronda L Dearing; Stephen A Maisto Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2019-04-25 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Katie Witkiewitz; John W Finney; Alex H S Harris; Daniel R Kivlahan; Henry R Kranzler Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2015-08-06 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Oghenowede Eyawo; Yanhong Deng; James Dziura; Amy C Justice; Kathleen McGinnis; Janet P Tate; Maria C Rodriguez-Barradas; Nathan B Hansen; Stephen A Maisto; Vincent C Marconi; Patrick G O'Connor; Kendall Bryant; David A Fiellin; E Jennifer Edelman Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2020-09-19 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Eun-Young Mun; Xiaoyin Li; Michael S Businelle; Emily T Hébert; Zhengqi Tan; Nancy P Barnett; Scott T Walters Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2021-03-03 Impact factor: 3.455