Improving the quality of reporting randomized controlled trials in cardiothoracic surgery: The way forward

Ravindranath Tiruvoipati, Sabapathy P. Balasubramanian, Gnaneswar Atturu, Giles J. Peek, Diana Elbourne

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

55 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials in cardiothoracic surgery, to identify factors associated with good reporting quality, and to assess the awareness of the Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials statement and ascertain the views of authors reporting randomized controlled trials on the difficulties in conducting randomized controlled trials and the possible ways to further improve the reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in cardiothoracic surgery. Methods: Randomized controlled trials of cardiothoracic surgery published in principal cardiothoracic and 4 general medical journals in 2003 were included. The quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials was assessed by using allocation concealment, the Jadad score, and a Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials checklist devised for the purpose. A questionnaire survey of authors reporting randomized controlled trials in principal cardiothoracic journals in 2003 was conducted. Results: The overall reporting quality of the 64 randomized controlled trials included in the analysis was suboptimal as assessed by the 3 methods adopted. Most of the authors (63.5%) were not aware of the Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials statement; however, awareness was not associated with reporting quality. More than 65% of the authors responded that conducting randomized controlled trials in surgical specialties was difficult, and the main difficulties were blinding and obtaining a large-enough sample size to detect statistically significant differences. Fifty-four percent of the authors responded that endorsement of the Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials statement by the cardiothoracic journals may improve the reporting quality. Conclusions: The quality of reporting randomized controlled trials in cardiothoracic surgery is suboptimal. Endorsement of the Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials statement by the cardiothoracic journals may improve the quality of reporting.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)233-240
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Volume132
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2006
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Randomized Controlled Trials
Surgical Specialties
Checklist
Sample Size

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Surgery

Cite this

Improving the quality of reporting randomized controlled trials in cardiothoracic surgery : The way forward. / Tiruvoipati, Ravindranath; Balasubramanian, Sabapathy P.; Atturu, Gnaneswar; Peek, Giles J.; Elbourne, Diana.

In: Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Vol. 132, No. 2, 08.2006, p. 233-240.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Tiruvoipati, Ravindranath ; Balasubramanian, Sabapathy P. ; Atturu, Gnaneswar ; Peek, Giles J. ; Elbourne, Diana. / Improving the quality of reporting randomized controlled trials in cardiothoracic surgery : The way forward. In: Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 2006 ; Vol. 132, No. 2. pp. 233-240.
@article{2ead8ff27e7c4fe191400882e4e3df7f,
title = "Improving the quality of reporting randomized controlled trials in cardiothoracic surgery: The way forward",
abstract = "Objective: To evaluate the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials in cardiothoracic surgery, to identify factors associated with good reporting quality, and to assess the awareness of the Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials statement and ascertain the views of authors reporting randomized controlled trials on the difficulties in conducting randomized controlled trials and the possible ways to further improve the reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in cardiothoracic surgery. Methods: Randomized controlled trials of cardiothoracic surgery published in principal cardiothoracic and 4 general medical journals in 2003 were included. The quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials was assessed by using allocation concealment, the Jadad score, and a Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials checklist devised for the purpose. A questionnaire survey of authors reporting randomized controlled trials in principal cardiothoracic journals in 2003 was conducted. Results: The overall reporting quality of the 64 randomized controlled trials included in the analysis was suboptimal as assessed by the 3 methods adopted. Most of the authors (63.5{\%}) were not aware of the Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials statement; however, awareness was not associated with reporting quality. More than 65{\%} of the authors responded that conducting randomized controlled trials in surgical specialties was difficult, and the main difficulties were blinding and obtaining a large-enough sample size to detect statistically significant differences. Fifty-four percent of the authors responded that endorsement of the Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials statement by the cardiothoracic journals may improve the reporting quality. Conclusions: The quality of reporting randomized controlled trials in cardiothoracic surgery is suboptimal. Endorsement of the Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials statement by the cardiothoracic journals may improve the quality of reporting.",
author = "Ravindranath Tiruvoipati and Balasubramanian, {Sabapathy P.} and Gnaneswar Atturu and Peek, {Giles J.} and Diana Elbourne",
year = "2006",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1016/j.jtcvs.2005.10.056",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "132",
pages = "233--240",
journal = "Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery",
issn = "0022-5223",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Improving the quality of reporting randomized controlled trials in cardiothoracic surgery

T2 - The way forward

AU - Tiruvoipati, Ravindranath

AU - Balasubramanian, Sabapathy P.

AU - Atturu, Gnaneswar

AU - Peek, Giles J.

AU - Elbourne, Diana

PY - 2006/8

Y1 - 2006/8

N2 - Objective: To evaluate the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials in cardiothoracic surgery, to identify factors associated with good reporting quality, and to assess the awareness of the Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials statement and ascertain the views of authors reporting randomized controlled trials on the difficulties in conducting randomized controlled trials and the possible ways to further improve the reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in cardiothoracic surgery. Methods: Randomized controlled trials of cardiothoracic surgery published in principal cardiothoracic and 4 general medical journals in 2003 were included. The quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials was assessed by using allocation concealment, the Jadad score, and a Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials checklist devised for the purpose. A questionnaire survey of authors reporting randomized controlled trials in principal cardiothoracic journals in 2003 was conducted. Results: The overall reporting quality of the 64 randomized controlled trials included in the analysis was suboptimal as assessed by the 3 methods adopted. Most of the authors (63.5%) were not aware of the Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials statement; however, awareness was not associated with reporting quality. More than 65% of the authors responded that conducting randomized controlled trials in surgical specialties was difficult, and the main difficulties were blinding and obtaining a large-enough sample size to detect statistically significant differences. Fifty-four percent of the authors responded that endorsement of the Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials statement by the cardiothoracic journals may improve the reporting quality. Conclusions: The quality of reporting randomized controlled trials in cardiothoracic surgery is suboptimal. Endorsement of the Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials statement by the cardiothoracic journals may improve the quality of reporting.

AB - Objective: To evaluate the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials in cardiothoracic surgery, to identify factors associated with good reporting quality, and to assess the awareness of the Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials statement and ascertain the views of authors reporting randomized controlled trials on the difficulties in conducting randomized controlled trials and the possible ways to further improve the reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in cardiothoracic surgery. Methods: Randomized controlled trials of cardiothoracic surgery published in principal cardiothoracic and 4 general medical journals in 2003 were included. The quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials was assessed by using allocation concealment, the Jadad score, and a Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials checklist devised for the purpose. A questionnaire survey of authors reporting randomized controlled trials in principal cardiothoracic journals in 2003 was conducted. Results: The overall reporting quality of the 64 randomized controlled trials included in the analysis was suboptimal as assessed by the 3 methods adopted. Most of the authors (63.5%) were not aware of the Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials statement; however, awareness was not associated with reporting quality. More than 65% of the authors responded that conducting randomized controlled trials in surgical specialties was difficult, and the main difficulties were blinding and obtaining a large-enough sample size to detect statistically significant differences. Fifty-four percent of the authors responded that endorsement of the Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials statement by the cardiothoracic journals may improve the reporting quality. Conclusions: The quality of reporting randomized controlled trials in cardiothoracic surgery is suboptimal. Endorsement of the Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials statement by the cardiothoracic journals may improve the quality of reporting.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33746189651&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33746189651&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2005.10.056

DO - 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2005.10.056

M3 - Article

C2 - 16872940

AN - SCOPUS:33746189651

VL - 132

SP - 233

EP - 240

JO - Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

JF - Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

SN - 0022-5223

IS - 2

ER -