Reporting Quality of Randomized, Controlled Trials Evaluating Combined Chemoradiotherapy in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma

医学 报告审判综合标准 致盲 随机对照试验 梅德林 鼻咽癌 质量得分 家庭医学 内科学 放射治疗 政治学 运营管理 经济 公制(单位) 法学
作者
Yu Chen,Lei Chen,Wen J. Li,Anne W.M. Lee,Jan B. Vermorken,Joseph Wee,Brian O'Sullivan,Avraham Eisbruch,Jianguo Lin,Hai-Qiang Mai,Li Zhang,Ying Guo,Ai Hua Lin,Jun Ma,Jun Ma
出处
期刊:International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics [Elsevier]
卷期号:98 (1): 170-176 被引量:5
标识
DOI:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.01.214
摘要

To comprehensively assess the reporting quality of randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) in nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC), and to identify significant predictors of quality.Two investigators searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for RCTs published between January 1988 and December 2015 that assessed the effect of combined chemoradiotherapy for NPC. The overall quality of each report was assessed using a 28-point overall quality score (OQS) based on the 2010 Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement. To provide baseline data for further evaluation, we also investigated the reporting quality of certain important issues in detail, including key methodologic items (allocation concealment, blinding, intention-to-treat principle), endpoints, follow-up, subgroup analyses, and adverse events.We retrieved 24 relevant RCTs including 6591 patients. Median 2010 OQS was 15.5 (range, 10-24). Half of the items in the 2010 OQS were poorly reported in at least 40% of trials. Multivariable regression models revealed that publication after 2010 and high impact factor were significant predictors of improved 2010 OQS. Additionally, many issues that we consider significant were not reported adequately.Despite publication of the CONSORT statement more than a decade ago, overall reporting quality for RCTs in NPC was unsatisfactory. Additionally, substantial selectivity and heterogeneity exists in reporting of certain crucial issues. This survey provides the first prompt for NPC trial investigators to improve reporting quality according to the CONSORT statement; increased scrutiny and diligence by editors and peer reviewers is also required.

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
刚刚
刚刚
1秒前
Junlin完成签到,获得积分10
2秒前
zb发布了新的文献求助10
2秒前
爆米花应助虚幻穆采纳,获得10
3秒前
3秒前
3秒前
俊逸的香萱完成签到 ,获得积分10
3秒前
5秒前
慕青应助宠溺Ovo采纳,获得10
5秒前
可爱的函函应助路过采纳,获得10
5秒前
12345发布了新的文献求助10
5秒前
ruanruan完成签到,获得积分20
6秒前
Raymond发布了新的文献求助30
6秒前
阳阳杜发布了新的文献求助10
6秒前
tigerli发布了新的文献求助10
6秒前
单薄傲易发布了新的文献求助10
6秒前
7秒前
龚圣博完成签到,获得积分10
7秒前
TeeteePor发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
Eatanicecube完成签到,获得积分10
7秒前
韦广阔发布了新的文献求助10
8秒前
zb完成签到,获得积分10
8秒前
9秒前
10秒前
丘比特应助旺仔采纳,获得10
11秒前
程澄发布了新的文献求助10
12秒前
onmyway完成签到,获得积分10
12秒前
酷波er应助也是来学习了采纳,获得10
13秒前
tigerli完成签到,获得积分10
13秒前
胡六条完成签到,获得积分10
14秒前
orange发布了新的文献求助10
14秒前
星辰大海应助清爽灵萱采纳,获得10
14秒前
李大洋发布了新的文献求助10
14秒前
14秒前
瘦瘦听云发布了新的文献求助10
14秒前
15秒前
奋斗的铅笔完成签到 ,获得积分10
15秒前
16秒前
高分求助中
Modern Epidemiology, Fourth Edition 5000
Kinesiophobia : a new view of chronic pain behavior 5000
Molecular Biology of Cancer: Mechanisms, Targets, and Therapeutics 3000
Digital Twins of Advanced Materials Processing 2000
Propeller Design 2000
Weaponeering, Fourth Edition – Two Volume SET 2000
Handbook of pharmaceutical excipients, Ninth edition 1500
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 工程类 有机化学 纳米技术 化学工程 生物化学 物理 计算机科学 内科学 复合材料 催化作用 物理化学 光电子学 电极 冶金 细胞生物学 基因
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 6011101
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 7559327
关于积分的说明 16136201
捐赠科研通 5157911
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 2762565
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 1741231
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 1633582