Inflammopharmacology

, 19:243 | Cite as

A note on the evaluation of BoNTA trial quality

Editorial

Abstract

In their systematic review, Zhang et al. evaluate randomized controlled trials on the efficacy of Botulinum toxin type A (BoNTA) in helping patients with musculoskeletal disorders. Scoring each trial according to the Jadad scale they note that the studies range from 1 to 5 with an average of 4.1, which they interpret as a testimony of the high quality of the studies included. Unfortunately, we cannot share the author’s enthusiasm, as a perfect Jadad score of 5 is no guarantee that a study is of good quality.

Keywords

Jadad score Randomized controlled trials Trial evaluation Trial quality Unmasking 

References

  1. Berger VW (2006) Is the Jadad score the proper evaluation of trials? J Rheumatol 33(8):1710–1711PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Berger VW (2009) Chewing gum and caries. JADA 140:638–640PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Berger VW, Alperson SY (2009) A general framework for the evaluation of clinical trial quality. Rev Recent Clin Trials 4(2):79–88PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Wong SM, Hui ACF, Tong P-Y, Poon DWF, Yu E, Wong LKS (2005) Treatment of lateral epicondylitis with botulinum toxin. Ann Intern Med 143:793–797PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Zhang T, Adatia A, Zarin W, Misha M, Vijenthira A, Chu R, Thabane L, Kean W (2011) The efficacy of botulinum toxin type A in managing chronic musculoskeletal pain: a systematic review and meta analysis. Inflammopharmacology 19(1):21–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Basel AG 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Biometry Research GroupNational Cancer InstituteBethesdaUSA

Personalised recommendations