Reporting of interventions in randomised trials: an audit of journal Instructions to Authors

Trials

Paul Glasziou²  Thomas English²  Tammy Hoffmann¹ 

[1] School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia;Centre for Research in Evidence-Based Practice, Faculty of Health Sciences Medicine, Bond University, 4229 Queensland, Australia

关键词: CONSORT;    Randomised controlled trial reporting;    Intervention reporting;   

Others  :  807646
DOI  :  10.1186/1745-6215-15-20

 received in 2013-09-09, accepted in 2013-12-23,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

A complete description of the intervention in a published trial report is necessary for readers to be able to use the intervention, yet the completeness of intervention descriptions in trials is very poor. Low awareness of the issue by authors, reviewers, and editors is part of the cause and providing specific instructions about intervention reporting to authors and encouraging full sharing of intervention materials is important. We assessed the extent to which: 1) journals’ Instructions to Authors provide instructions about how interventions that have been evaluated in a randomised controlled trial (RCT) should be reported in the paper; and 2) journals offer the option of authors providing online supplementary materials.

Methods

We examined the web-based Instructions to Authors of 106 journals (the six leading general medical journals, 50 randomly selected journals from the National Library of Medicine’s Core Clinical Journals, and 50 randomly selected journals from the remainder of the journal collection indexed by PubMed). To be eligible, each journal must have published at least one randomised trial involving human participants each year from 2008 to 2012. We extracted all information related to the reporting of interventions, reporting of randomised trials in general, and online supplementary materials.

Results

Of the 106 journals’ Instructions to Authors, only 15 (14%) specifically mentioned the reporting of interventions and most of these provided non-specific advice such as ‘describe essential features’. Just over half (62, 58%) of the journals mentioned the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement in their author instructions. Seventy-eight (74%) of the journals’ instructions mentioned the option of providing supplementary content online as part of the paper; however, only four of these journals explicitly encouraged or mandated use of this option for providing intervention information or materials.

Conclusions

Most journals’ Instructions to Authors do not provide any specific instructions regarding reporting of interventions or encourage authors to provide online supplementary materials to enhance intervention reporting. Journals can help to improve the problem of incomplete intervention reporting by providing specific instructions to authors and peer reviewers about intervention reporting and requiring full intervention descriptions to be provided.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Hoffmann et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Hoffmann TC, Erueti C, Glasziou PP: Poor description of non-pharmacological interventions: a remediable barrier to evidence use in practice? BMJ 2013, 347:f3755.
• [2]Glasziou P, Meats E, Heneghan C, Shepperd S: What is missing from descriptions of treatment in trials and reviews? BMJ 2008, 336:1472-1474.
• [3]Conn VS, Cooper PS, Ruppar TM, Russell CL: Searching for the intervention in intervention research reports. J Nurs Scholarsh 2008, 40:52-59.
• [4]Jacquier I, Boutron I, Moher D, Roy C, Ravaud P: The reporting of randomised clinical trials using a surgical intervention is in need of immediate improvement: a systematic review. Ann Surg 2006, 244:677-683.
• [5]Duff JM, Leather H, Walden EO, LaPlant KD, George TJ: Adequacy of published oncology randomised controlled trials to provide therapeutic details needed for clinical application. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010, 102:702-705.
• [6]Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D: CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 2010, 340:c332.
• [7]Turner L, Shamseer L, Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D: Does use of the CONSORT Statement impact the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials published in medical journals? A cochrane review. Syst Rev 2012, 1:60. BioMed Central Full Text
• [8]Schroter S, Glasziou P, Heneghan C: Quality of descriptions of treatments: a review of published randomised controlled trials. BMJ Open 2012, 2:1-7.
• [9]Glasziou P, Chalmers I, Altman DG, Bastian H, Boutron I, Brice A, Jamtvedt G, Farmer A, Ghersi D, Groves T, Heneghan C, Hill S, Lewin S, Michie S, Perera R, Pomeroy V, Tilson J, Shepperd S, Williams JW: Taking healthcare interventions from trial to practice. BMJ 2010, 341:c3852.
• [10]Boutron I, Moher D, Altman DG, Schulz KF, Ravaud P: Extending the CONSORT statement to randomised trials of nonpharmacologic treatment: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2008, 148:295-310.
• [11]Gagnier JJ, Boon H, Rochon P, Moher D, Barnes J, Bombardier C, CONSORT Group: Reporting randomised, controlled trials of herbal interventions: an elaborated CONSORT statement. Ann Intern Med 2006, 144:364-367.
• [12]Eysenbach G, CONSORT-EHEALTH Group: CONSORT-EHEALTH: improving and standardising evaluation reports of web-based and mobile health interventions. J Med Internet Res 2011, 13:e126.
• [13]Dean ME, Coulter MK, Fisher P, Jobst K, Walach H: Reporting data on homeopathic treatments (RedHot): a supplement to CONSORT. Homeopathy 2007, 96:42-45.
• [14]Hirst A, Altman DG: Are peer reviewers encouraged to use reporting guidelines? A survey of 116 health research journals. PLoS One 2012, 7:e35621.
• [15]Hopewell S, Altman DG, Moher D, Schulz KF: Endorsement of the CONSORT Statement by high impact factor medical journals: a survey of journal editors and journal “Instructions to Authors”. Trials 2008, 9:20. BioMed Central Full Text
• [16]Schriger D, Arora S, Altman DG: The content of medical journal instructions for authors. Ann Emerg Med 2006, 48:743-749.
• [17]Chalmers I, Altman DG: How can medical journals help prevent poor medical research? Some opportunities presented by electronic publishing. Lancet 1999, 353:490-493.
• [18]Schriger D, Chehrazi A, Merchant R, Altman DG: Use of the internet by print medical journals in 2003 to 2009: a longitudinal observational study. Ann Emerg Med 2011, 57:153-160.
• [19]Michie S, Fixsen D, Grimshaw JM, Eccles MP: Specifying and reporting complex behaviour change interventions: the need for a scientific method. Implement Sci 2009, 4:40. BioMed Central Full Text