Literature DB >> 28085789

Reporting of Design Features and Analysis Details in Randomized Clinical Trials of Procedural Treatments for Cancer Pain: An ACTTION Systematic Review.

Daniel Rothstein1, Rachel A Kitt, Shannon M Smith, Salahadin Abdi, Mitchell P Engle, Michael P McDermott, Srinivasa N Raja, Dennis C Turk, Robert H Dworkin, Jennifer S Gewandter.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to assess the reporting of randomized clinical trials investigating procedural treatments (eg, nerve blocks, targeted drug delivery) for cancer pain, with a focus on aspects that are particularly challenging in these trials.
METHODS: This article presents results from a systematic review of reporting of randomized clinical trials of procedural interventions for cancer pain. Articles were identified by searching PubMed from 1966 to June 2014. Data related to quality of reporting are presented for early (1985-2004) and late periods (2005-2014).
RESULTS: A total of 35 published trials were included. Approximately two-thirds of the articles clearly indicated the level of blinding. Only 26% reported a primary outcome measure. Less than half explicitly reported the number of patients who completed the trial, and only 1 reported a method that was used to accommodate missing data. Almost one-third of articles included a responder analysis, all of which specified the definition of a responder.
CONCLUSIONS: The goal of highlighting these deficiencies in reporting is to promote transparent reporting of details affecting the completion and interpretation of procedural cancer pain trials so that their quality can be more easily evaluated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28085789      PMCID: PMC6784314          DOI: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000553

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Reg Anesth Pain Med        ISSN: 1098-7339            Impact factor:   6.288


  25 in total

1.  Clinical research in palliative care: choice of trial design.

Authors:  C Mazzocato; C Sweeney; E Bruera
Journal:  Palliat Med       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 4.762

2.  Better reporting of harms in randomized trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement.

Authors:  John P A Ioannidis; Stephen J W Evans; Peter C Gøtzsche; Robert T O'Neill; Douglas G Altman; Kenneth Schulz; David Moher
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2004-11-16       Impact factor: 25.391

3.  Use of the cumulative proportion of responders analysis graph to present pain data over a range of cut-off points: making clinical trial data more understandable.

Authors:  John T Farrar; Robert H Dworkin; Mitchell B Max
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 3.612

4.  Reliability is Necessary but Far From Sufficient: How Might the Validity of Pain Ratings be Improved?

Authors:  Robert H Dworkin; Laurie B Burke; Jennifer S Gewandter; Shannon M Smith
Journal:  Clin J Pain       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 3.442

5.  Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical pain rating scale.

Authors:  John T Farrar; James P Young; Linda LaMoreaux; John L Werth; Michael R Poole
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 6.961

6.  Symptoms during cancer pain treatment following WHO-guidelines: a longitudinal follow-up study of symptom prevalence, severity and etiology.

Authors:  T Meuser; C Pietruck; L Radbruch; P Stute; K A Lehmann; S Grond
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 6.961

7.  Considerations for improving assay sensitivity in chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations.

Authors:  Robert H Dworkin; Dennis C Turk; Sarah Peirce-Sandner; Laurie B Burke; John T Farrar; Ian Gilron; Mark P Jensen; Nathaniel P Katz; Srinivasa N Raja; Bob A Rappaport; Michael C Rowbotham; Misha-Miroslav Backonja; Ralf Baron; Nicholas Bellamy; Zubin Bhagwagar; Ann Costello; Penney Cowan; Weikai Christopher Fang; Sharon Hertz; Gary W Jay; Roderick Junor; Robert D Kerns; Rosemary Kerwin; Ernest A Kopecky; Dmitri Lissin; Richard Malamut; John D Markman; Michael P McDermott; Catherine Munera; Linda Porter; Christine Rauschkolb; Andrew S C Rice; Cristina Sampaio; Vladimir Skljarevski; Kenneth Sommerville; Brett R Stacey; Ilona Steigerwald; Jeffrey Tobias; Ann Marie Trentacosti; Ajay D Wasan; George A Wells; Jim Williams; James Witter; Dan Ziegler
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2012-04-09       Impact factor: 6.961

Review 8.  Adherence to CONSORT harms-reporting recommendations in publications of recent analgesic clinical trials: an ACTTION systematic review.

Authors:  Shannon M Smith; Daniel R Chang; Anthony Pereira; Nirupa Shah; Ian Gilron; Nathaniel P Katz; Allison H Lin; Michael P McDermott; Bob A Rappaport; Michael C Rowbotham; Cristina Sampaio; Dennis C Turk; Robert H Dworkin
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2012-09-15       Impact factor: 6.961

Review 9.  Reporting of primary analyses and multiplicity adjustment in recent analgesic clinical trials: ACTTION systematic review and recommendations.

Authors:  Jennifer S Gewandter; Shannon M Smith; Andrew McKeown; Laurie B Burke; Sharon H Hertz; Matthew Hunsinger; Nathaniel P Katz; Allison H Lin; Michael P McDermott; Bob A Rappaport; Mark R Williams; Dennis C Turk; Robert H Dworkin
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2013-11-23       Impact factor: 6.961

10.  Why most published research findings are false.

Authors:  John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2005-08-30       Impact factor: 11.613

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.