 |
|
How Well Are Randomized Controlled Trials Reported in the Dermatology Literature?
Kayode Adetugbo, PhD;
Hywel Williams, PhD
Arch Dermatol. 2000;136:381-385.
Objective To assess the methodological quality of the design and reporting of randomized controlled trials published in one major dermatology specialty journal.
Design and Data Sources In a survey of all published parallel group randomized controlled trials, we found 73 reports with allocation described as randomized from all issues of Clinical and Experimental Dermatology from its inception in 1976 through 1997.
Main Outcome Measures Direct and indirect measures of the adequacy of randomization, trial sample size, baseline comparisons, and intention-to-treat analysis.
Results Hand searching identified 73 randomized controlled trials, but only 31 of these were found by searching MEDLINE for the publication type clinical trials. Of the 73 randomized controlled trials, 68 contained sufficient information to include in the analysis. Only 1 study (1%) reported the method of random sequence generation, and only 5 studies (7%) reported adequate concealment of allocation. Among 38 trials that used simple randomization, the sample sizes in the comparison groups were identical in 22 occasions, raising the possibility that simple randomization might not have been adequately generated or concealed. Most trials (88%) excluded some randomized participants from their analysis. The median sample size was 23 per trial. Only 1 trial reported sample size and statistical power considerations and had an a priori main hypothesis.
Conclusions Hand searching is important for locating all relevant trials. There is the need for higher methodological quality in clinical trial reporting in dermatology journals. The adoption of the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement and checklist for the reporting of trials should enhance the validity of and strengthen the evidence from clinical trials reports.
From the Cochrane Skin Group, Dermato-Epidemiology Unit, Queen's Medical Centre, University Hospital, Nottingham, England.
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
|
The intention-to-treat approach in randomized controlled trials: Are authors saying what they do and doing what they say?
Gravel et al.
Clin Trials 2007;4:350-356.
ABSTRACT
Quality of reporting of randomized, controlled trials in cerebral palsy.
Anttila et al.
Pediatrics 2006;117:2222-2230.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Bias in Clinical Intervention Research
Gluud
Am J Epidemiol 2006;163:493-501.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
A Review of the True Methodological Quality of Nutritional Support Trials Conducted in the Critically Ill: Time for Improvement
Doig et al.
Anesth. Analg. 2005;100:527-533.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The Number, Quality, and Coverage of Randomized Controlled Trials in Nephrology
Strippoli et al.
J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 2004;15:411-419.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Has CONSORT improved the reporting of randomized controlled trials in the palliative care literature? A systematic review
Piggott et al.
Palliat Med 2004;18:32-38.
ABSTRACT
Appraising Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses
Bigby and Williams
Arch Dermatol 2003;139:795-798.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The Landscape and Lexicon of Blinding in Randomized Trials
Schulz et al.
ANN INTERN MED 2002;136:254-259.
FULL TEXT
Exorex for Psoriasis: The Importance of Randomized Controlled Trials in Testing "New" Products
Williams
Arch Dermatol 2001;137:1637-1638.
FULL TEXT
The Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: Explanation and Elaboration
Altman et al.
ANN INTERN MED 2001;134:663-694.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
How Can Hand Searching the Dermatological Literature Benefit People With Skin Problems?
Delamere and Williams
Arch Dermatol 2001;137:332-335.
FULL TEXT
|
