Quality of randomized controlled trials reporting in the treatment of melasma conducted in China

Zhiwei Chen · Yu‐Chi Chen · Jingchun Zeng · Yang Wang · Teng Ye · Qiaochu Zhou +3 more

9 citations0/0 files storedTrials

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Meta-analysis and systematic reviews scientometrics and bibliometrics research Dermatologic Treatments and Research

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is no existing report on the quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of melasma treatment currently conducted in China. This study aims to assess the quality of RCT- reporting in the treatment of melasma conducted in China. METHODS: Several databases were searched from their inception through to August 2014. In order to rate the report quality, we scored 1 for the item if it was reported in CONSORT 2010 and 0 for the item if it was not definitely stated or was not clear. For overall quality score (OQS), 13 items were scored and calculated with a range of 0 to 13. Five items ('randomization', 'allocation concealment', 'blinding', 'baseline characteristics' and 'intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis') were scored and a key methodological index score (MIS) was calculated with a range of 0 to 5 for each trial. RESULTS: A total of 246 relevant RCTs were included in the final analysis. The median OQS was 7, with a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 11. Some items' information was insufficient, especially in the categories of 'trial design', 'sample size', 'recruitment' and 'ancillary analyses' with a positive rate of less than 20%. The median MIS was 1 with a minimum of 0 and a maximum of 3. Some items' reporting was poor, especially in the categories of 'randomization', 'allocation concealment and implementation', 'blinding' and 'ITT analysis' with a positive rate of less than 10%. The mean OQS increased by about 0.52 for manuscripts published in the period of 5-year increments (95% CI: 0.32 to 0.72; P < 0.001). With regard to the MIS, no variable was statistically significant in the ordinal regression model. CONCLUSION: The reporting quality of RCTs in the treatment of melasma conducted in China is not satisfactory especially in key methodological items. Reporting of RCTs in this field should meet and keep up with the standards of the CONSORT statement.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 9 citations exist upstream.

References

2010CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials 2011CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials 2001Reported Methodologic Quality and Discrepancies between Large and Small Randomized Trials in Meta-Analyses 2002In the dark The reporting of blinding status in randomized controlled trials 2006Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials Reporting in the Primary Treatment of Brain Tumors 2008Quality of Reporting of Randomized Controlled Trials in General Endocrinology Literature 2008Correction: Reported Methodologic Quality and Discrepancies between Large and Small Randomized Trials in Meta-Analyses 2011Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials Reporting in the Treatment of Sarcomas

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.