Advertisement

European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry

, Volume 16, Issue 2, pp 181–189 | Cite as

An assessment of the quality of reporting randomised controlled trials published in paediatric dentistry journals

  • S. RajasekharanEmail author
  • J. Vandenbulcke
  • L. Martens
Original Scientific Article

Abstract

Aim

The objectives of this study are to compare the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in 2011 and 2012 within five paediatric dentistry journals.

Study design

RCTs published in the years 2011 and 2012 were hand-searched by one reviewer. After randomisation and blinding, these journals were independently scored by two blinded reviewers based on the CONSORT 2010 checklist.

Methods

A total of 59 articles were included for analysis and 70 criteria were scored dichotomously as ‘1’ when reported and ‘0’ when not reported. Descriptive statistics and one-way ANOVA tests were performed.

Results

The Gwets AC1 Inter rater reliability coefficient was calculated as 0.85 (95 % C.I 0.84–0.86) indicating excellent correlation between the two reviewers. Only 19 articles (32.2 %) reported more than half (35/70) of the expected criteria. Descriptive statistics showed that sections such as introduction, results and discussion were reported better than abstract, materials and methods and other information. One-way ANOVA tests showed no significant difference (p > 0.05) in the reporting of criteria across different journals and there was also no significant difference between the articles published in 2011 and 2012 (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

The general quality of reporting of RCTs in paediatric dentistry journals was inadequate. Authors, reviewers and journal guidelines must work together towards a common goal for improving the quality of reporting of RCTs.

Keywords

Randomised controlled trial CONSORT 

Notes

Acknowledgments

No funding was received for this study.

References

  1. Al-Namankany AA, Ashley P, Moles DR, Parekh S. Assessment of the quality of reporting of randomized clinical trials in paediatric dentistry journals. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2009;19:318–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Altman DG, Moher D, Schulz KF. Improving the reporting of randomised trials: the CONSORT Statement and beyond. Stat Med. 2012;31:2985–97.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement. JAMA. 1996;276:637–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Cairo F, Sanz I, Matesanz P, Nieri M, Pagliaro U. Quality of reporting of randomized clinical trials in implant dentistry. A systematic review on critical aspects in design, outcome assessment and clinical relevance. J Clin Periodontol. 2012;39(Suppl 12):81–107.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Chalmers I. Underreporting research is scientific misconduct. JAMA. 1990a;263:1405–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Chalmers I. Underreporting Research Is Scientific Misconduct. JAMA. 1990b;263:1405–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Concato J, Shah N, Horwitz RI. Randomized, controlled trials, observational studies, and the hierarchy of research designs. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:1887–92.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Deangelis CD, Drazen JM, Frizelle FA, et al. Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2005;131:479–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Faggion JR, Clovis M, Giannakopoulos NN. Quality of reporting in abstracts of randomized controlled trials published in leading journals of periodontology and implant dentistry: a survey. J Periodontol. 2012;83:1251–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Fleiss JL. Statistical methods for rates and proportions. New York: Wiley; 1981.Google Scholar
  11. Fleming PS, Buckley N, Seehra J, Polychronopoulou A, Pandis N. Reporting quality of abstracts of randomized controlled trials published in leading orthodontic journals from 2006 to 2011. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2012;142:451–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Glasziou P, Chalmers I, Rawlins M, McCulloch P. When are randomised trials unnecessary? Picking signal from noise. BMJ. 2007;334:349–51.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Harrison JE. Clinical trials in orthodontics II: assessment of the quality of reporting of clinical trials published in three orthodontic journals between 1989 and 1998. J Orthod. 2003;30:309–15 (discussion 297–8).CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Higgins JPT, Green S, Cochrane Collaboration. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell; 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jokstad A, Esposito M, Coulthard P, Worthington HV. The reporting of randomized controlled trials in prosthodontics. Int J Prosthodont. 2002;15:230–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Koletsi D, Pandis N, Polychronopoulou A, Eliades T. What’s in a title? An assessment of whether randomized controlled trial in a title means that it is one. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2012;141:679–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Marshman Z, Farid F. The quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials in dental public health. Community Dent Health. 2010;27:253–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, et al. CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ. 2010;340:c869.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Moher D, Jadad AR, Nichol G, Penman M, Tugwell P, Walsh S. Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: an annotated bibliography of scales and checklists. Control Clin Trials. 1995;16:62–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. Lancet. 2001;357:1191–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Pandis N, Polychronopoulou A, Eliades T. An assessment of quality characteristics of randomised control trials published in dental journals. J Dent. 2010;38:713–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Plint AC, Moher D, Morrison A, et al. Does the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials? A systematic review. Med J Aust. 2006;185:263–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Rosner AL. Evidence-based medicine: revisiting the pyramid of priorities. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2012;16:42–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. Ann Intern Med. 2010;152:726–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Turner L, Shamseer L, Altman DG, et al. Consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) and the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in medical journals. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;11:MR000030.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Williams HC. Cars, CONSORT 2010, and clinical practice. Trials. 2010;11:33.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Paediatric Dentistry and Special Care, PaeCaMeD ResearchGhent UniversityGhentBelgium

Personalised recommendations