随机对照试验对 2010 年 CONSORT 报告标准的依从性：对 2011-2016 年 3 种牙周病学期刊发表的随机对照试验的调查。

Adherence of Randomized Controlled Trials to Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials 2010 Guidelines: A Survey of Randomized Controlled Trials Published in 2011-2016 in 3 Periodontology Journals.

机构信息

Department of Public Health Dentistry, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Manipal, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India.

出版信息

J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2019 Sep;19(3):260-272. doi: 10.1016/j.jebdp.2019.04.001. Epub 2019 Apr 9.

DOI:10.1016/j.jebdp.2019.04.001

PMID:31732102

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To assess the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the Journal of Clinical Periodontology (JCP), Journal of Periodontology (JOP), and Journal of Periodontal Research (JPR), published in the years 2011 until 2016, using Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2010 guidelines.

METHODS

A thorough search of PubMed for RCTs published between January 2011 and December 2016 in the three journals was carried out. The CONSORT 2010 checklist (36 questions) was used to evaluate the adherence of these RCTs to these guidelines. A modified CONSORT score was calculated and categorized as "perfect" (100%), "excellent" (80%-99%), "good" (60%-79%), "modest" (40%-59%), and "poor" (<40%).

RESULTS

A total of 369 RCTs were published in the three periodontology journals from 2011 until 2016. Based on the modified CONSORT score among all the RCTs, title, abstract, and introduction sections of the included RCTs showed good adherence to the CONSORT 2010 guidelines (60%-79%), whereas the adherence was poor for half the items in methodology (<40%), results (<40%), and discussion (40%). The highest modified CONSORT score was obtained for the trials published in the JCP from 2011 to 2016, whereas the lowest score was achieved by the RCTs in the JPR. Overall, none of the RCTs in any of the journals were perfect in reporting the trials as per the guidelines. Almost half of the RCTs in the JCP showed good adherence (51.1%), whereas almost three-fourths of the RCTs in the JOP (72%) and JPR (82.7%) showed modest to poor adherence as per the reporting guidelines (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Among the three periodontology journals assessed, the JCP showed better adherence than the JOP and JPR from 2011 until 2016.

摘要

目的

使用 CONSORT 2010 指南评估 2011 年至 2016 年期间发表在《临床牙周病学杂志》（JCP）、《牙周病学杂志》（JOP）和《牙周病学研究杂志》（JPR）上的随机对照试验（RCT）的报告质量。

方法

在 PubMed 上对 2011 年 1 月至 2016 年 12 月期间发表在这三种期刊上的 RCT 进行了全面检索。使用 CONSORT 2010 清单（36 个问题）来评估这些 RCT 对这些指南的遵守情况。计算了改良 CONSORT 评分，并将其归类为“完美”（100%）、“优秀”（80%-99%）、“良好”（60%-79%）、“中等”（40%-59%）和“差”（<40%）。

结果

从 2011 年至 2016 年，三种牙周病学期刊共发表了 369 篇 RCT。根据所有 RCT 的改良 CONSORT 评分，纳入 RCT 的标题、摘要和引言部分对 CONSORT 2010 指南的遵守情况良好（60%-79%），而方法学（<40%）、结果（<40%）和讨论（40%）的一半项目遵守情况较差。2011 年至 2016 年在 JCP 上发表的试验获得了最高的改良 CONSORT 评分，而在 JPR 上发表的 RCT 获得了最低的评分。总体而言，任何一种期刊上的 RCT 都没有完全按照指南报告试验。JCP 中近一半的 RCT 表现出良好的依从性（51.1%），而 JOP（72%）和 JPR（82.7%）的 RCT 中近四分之三（72%和 82.7%）表现出中等至较差的依从性（P<.001）。