Literature DB >> 27145452

Methodological quality of antimalarial randomized controlled trials during pregnancy and its impact on the risk of low birth weight.

Flory T Muanda1,2, Anick Bérard1,2.   

Abstract

AIM: To describe biases in antimalarial randomized controlled trials (RCTs) during pregnancy and their influence on antimalarial drug efficacy to reduce the risk of low birth weight (LBW).
METHODS: RCT characteristics and results were retrieved from a previous systematic review on the efficacy of antimalarials. The Cochrane risk of bias assessment was used to investigate source of biases in each RCT. The quality of RCT reporting published after the introduction of the CONSORT statement in medical literature in 1996 were compared to those published before 1996. A meta-regression analysis was performed to examine the impact of bias on the efficacy of antimalarials to reduce LBW after controlling for the time period prior to 1996.
RESULTS: Twenty out of 25 RCTs (80%) had a high risk of bias. The proportion of RCTs having a low risk of bias was higher in manuscripts published after the introduction of CONSORT compared to those published before 1996 for sequence generation (P = 0.04) and allocation concealment (P = 0.04). Heterogeneity between RCTs was associated with an overestimation of the efficacy of antimalarial drugs in reducing LBW in RCTs with inadequate methods for randomization, allocation concealment or not being free of other bias.
CONCLUSION: Antimalarial RCTs during pregnancy are poorly reported but may be improved by using the CONSORT statement. After taking into account the time period before 1996, we found that biases had an impact on the efficacy of antimalarials to reduce the risk of LBW.
© 2016 The British Pharmacological Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  meta-regression; randomized controlled trials; risk of bias

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27145452      PMCID: PMC5338103          DOI: 10.1111/bcp.12998

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol        ISSN: 0306-5251            Impact factor:   4.335


  25 in total

Review 1.  Systematic reviews in health care: Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials.

Authors:  P Jüni; D G Altman; M Egger
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-07-07

2.  Bad reporting does not mean bad methods for randomised trials: observational study of randomised controlled trials performed by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group.

Authors:  Heloisa P Soares; Stephanie Daniels; Ambuj Kumar; Mike Clarke; Charles Scott; Suzanne Swann; Benjamin Djulbegovic
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-01-03

Review 3.  Bias in clinical intervention research.

Authors:  Lise Lotte Gluud
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2006-01-27       Impact factor: 4.897

4.  Impact of allocation concealment on conclusions drawn from meta-analyses of randomized trials.

Authors:  J Pildal; A Hróbjartsson; K J Jørgensen; J Hilden; D G Altman; P C Gøtzsche
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2007-05-21       Impact factor: 7.196

5.  Recommended tests for association in 2 x 2 tables.

Authors:  Stian Lydersen; Morten W Fagerland; Petter Laake
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2009-03-30       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  Meta-analysis and the meta-epidemiology of clinical research.

Authors:  C D Naylor
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1997-09-13

7.  Methodological quality of antimalarial randomized controlled trials during pregnancy and its impact on the risk of low birth weight.

Authors:  Flory T Muanda; Anick Bérard
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2016-06-13       Impact factor: 4.335

8.  Influence of reported study design characteristics on intervention effect estimates from randomized, controlled trials.

Authors:  Jelena Savović; Hayley E Jones; Douglas G Altman; Ross J Harris; Peter Jüni; Julie Pildal; Bodil Als-Nielsen; Ethan M Balk; Christian Gluud; Lise Lotte Gluud; John P A Ioannidis; Kenneth F Schulz; Rebecca Beynon; Nicky J Welton; Lesley Wood; David Moher; Jonathan J Deeks; Jonathan A C Sterne
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2012-09-18       Impact factor: 25.391

9.  Quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials in polycystic ovary syndrome.

Authors:  Anna Partsinevelou; Elias Zintzaras
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2009-11-20       Impact factor: 2.279

Review 10.  Does use of the CONSORT Statement impact the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials published in medical journals? A Cochrane review.

Authors:  Lucy Turner; Larissa Shamseer; Douglas G Altman; Kenneth F Schulz; David Moher
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2012-11-29
View more
  1 in total

1.  Methodological quality of antimalarial randomized controlled trials during pregnancy and its impact on the risk of low birth weight.

Authors:  Flory T Muanda; Anick Bérard
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2016-06-13       Impact factor: 4.335

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.