Assessment of Reporting Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials in Seven Journals Using the CONSORT Statement_Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Authors：

1. Medical Journal of Chinese People’s Liberation Army. Beijing 100036, China; 2. Department of Evidence-Based Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University. Chengdu 610041, China;

Corresponding author：

Keywords：

Military medical journal; CONSORT; Randomized controlled trial; Reporting quality

DOI：

10.7507/1672-2531.20100437

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Objective 　To evaluate the reporting quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in seven military medical journals.
Methods 　Seven journals in 2007, including Medical Journal of Chinese People’s Liberation Army, Journal of South Medical University, Journal of Second Military Medical University, Journal of Third Military Medical University, Journal of Fourth Military Medical University, Bulletin of the Academy of Military of Medical Sciences and Academic Journal of PLA Postgraduate Medical School, were handsearched. We identified RCTs labeled “random” and assessed the quality of these reports using the Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials (CONSORT) statement.
Results 　We identified 99 RCTs, but found an incorrect randomized method was used in 6 RCTs. According to the items in the CONSORT statement in 93 RCTs, 62 (66.7%) RCTs described baseline demographic and clinical characteristics in each group. Sixteen (17.2%) RCTs mentioned the method of random sequence generation, with 5 (5.4%) using a computer allocation. Only 1 RCT had adequate allocation concealment. Only 9 (9.7%) RCTs used blinding, with 2 mentioning blinding, 1 using single blinding and 6 described as double-blind (2 were correct). Zero (0%) reported the sample size calculation and 1 RCT reported the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis.
Conclusion 　The reporting quality of RCTs in seven journals is poor. The CONSORT statement should be used to standardize the reporting of RCTs.

Citation： ZHANG Xiaoli,JIA Wannian,HU Quanbing,LI Jing,XIONG Xiaoran,SHENning,ZHANG Qingshan,FAN Chenfang,LI Enjiang. Assessment of Reporting Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials in Seven Journals Using the CONSORT Statement. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2010, 10(4): 501-504. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.20100437 Copy

1.	Pringle M, Churchill R. Randomised controlled trials in general practice. BMJ, 1995, 311(7017): 1382-1383.
2.	Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D, et al. The Revised CONSORT Statement for RDoes the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials? A systematic review. Randomized Trials Explanation and Elaboration. Ann Intern Med, 2001, 134(8): 663-694.
3.	Schulz K, Altman DG, Hill C, et al. Does the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials? A systematic review. Med J Aust, 2006, 185(5): 263-267.
4.	卫茂玲, 辜蕊, 张鸣明, 等. 11种地方性中医药期刊1995～2000年临床研究文献质量的初步分析. 中国循证医学杂志, 2004, 6(6): 410-413.
5.	毛兵, 王刚, 陈小东, 等. 《中国中西医结合杂志》发表随机对照试验报告的质量评价. 中国循证医学杂志, 2006, 6(4): 297-304.
6.	张小利, 李静, 张鸣明, 等. 采用CONSORT和STRICTA评价针刺治疗急性缺血性脑卒中随机对照试验报告质量. 中国循证医学杂志, 2006, 8(8): 586-590.
7.	Schulz KF. Assessing allocation concealment and blinding in randomised controlled trials: why bother? ACP J Club, 2000, 132(2): A11-A12.

1. Pringle M, Churchill R. Randomised controlled trials in general practice. BMJ, 1995, 311(7017): 1382-1383.
2. Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D, et al. The Revised CONSORT Statement for RDoes the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials? A systematic review. Randomized Trials Explanation and Elaboration. Ann Intern Med, 2001, 134(8): 663-694.
3. Schulz K, Altman DG, Hill C, et al. Does the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials? A systematic review. Med J Aust, 2006, 185(5): 263-267.
4. 卫茂玲, 辜蕊, 张鸣明, 等. 11种地方性中医药期刊1995～2000年临床研究文献质量的初步分析. 中国循证医学杂志, 2004, 6(6): 410-413.
5. 毛兵, 王刚, 陈小东, 等. 《中国中西医结合杂志》发表随机对照试验报告的质量评价. 中国循证医学杂志, 2006, 6(4): 297-304.
6. 张小利, 李静, 张鸣明, 等. 采用CONSORT和STRICTA评价针刺治疗急性缺血性脑卒中随机对照试验报告质量. 中国循证医学杂志, 2006, 8(8): 586-590.
7. Schulz KF. Assessing allocation concealment and blinding in randomised controlled trials: why bother? ACP J Club, 2000, 132(2): A11-A12.

Previous Article
Effects of Pseudo-ginseng Tongshu Capsule on Changes Of Bloodstream, Blood Plasma Lipid and Fibrin of Patients with Brain Infarction

Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Assessment of Reporting Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials in Seven Journals Using the CONSORT Statement

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Format

Content