Articlegreen2019

Reporting Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials in Restless Legs Syndrome Based on the CONSORT Statement

Dimitrios Rikos · Efthimios Dardiotis · Athina‐Maria Aloizou · Vasileios Siokas · Elias Zintzaras · Georgios M. Hadjigeorgiou

8 citations0/0 files storedEurope PMC (PubMed Central)

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 Academic Publishing and Open Access Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare

Abstract

Background: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the cornerstone of modern medical research, and their reporting may not always be optimal. The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement is an evidence-based means to improve the quality of RCTs' reporting by providing a checklist of recommended items.The aim of this study was to assess the reporting quality of published RCTs on the restless legs syndrome (RLS), based on a checklist arising from the CONSORT statement. Methods: Medical electronic databases were searched for RCTs involving patients with RLS. Inclusion criteria were follows: articles must have been published in English and RLS patients must have been randomized into a minimum of two treatment cohorts of different medicinal orientations. CONSORT-recommended items were marked as "reported" or "not reported," and an overall CONSORT compliance metric was calculated. Comparisons among different time periods, CONSORT-endorsing and non-endorsing, and different levels of impact factor journals were made. Results: Fifty-four eligible trials, published in 21 different scientific journals, were found. The average CONSORT compliance score was 56.6% (23.68-84.21%). CONSORT-endorsing journals had a mean CONSORT compliance of 58.47%, whereas non-endorsing journals had a mean CONSORT compliance of 50.4%. The median CONSORT compliance for articles published in low- (IF<2), medium- (IF 2-7), and high-ranked (IF>7) journals was 52.63, 56.57, and 59.21%, respectively. Only 14 of the 38 CONSORT items (36.8%) were reported in >75% of the articles. Discussion: This study shows that the reporting of RLS-related RCTs is suboptimal, regardless of the time period, the quality of the publishing journal, and the endorsing or non-endorsing 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 — 8 citations exist upstream.

References

2010CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials 1995Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials 1998Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses?1996Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement 2001Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials 2008Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study 2012Consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) and the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in medical journals 2005Epidemiology and reporting of randomised trials published in PubMed journals

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.