Abstract
Purpose: Randomized controlled trial (RCT) is considered as the most reliable source of information in evidence-based medicine, provided that clear, transparent and detailed information are transferred to the reader. Sometimes, an abstract is the only accessible source of an RCT result. The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of RCT abstracts presented at the Turkish National Surgical Congresses.
Materials and Methods: Abstract books published for three biennial Congresses of the Turkish Surgical Society (Years 2004, 2006 and 2008) were evaluated. All RCT abstracts were then identified and reviewed according to the checklist items provided by CONSORT guideline for abstract reporting. Inter-year comparisons were also performed to determine if there has been an improvement in the quality over time.
Results: Among overall 2725 abstracts of verbal and poster presentations, some 100 (3.7%) were identified as an RCT and were included in the final analysis. In the majority of the abstracts, the participants (94%), objective (86%), interventions (96%), number of patients-randomized (96%) and conclusions (98%) were reported satisfactorily. Reporting of the primary outcome was the only variable that has improved over time. There were poor reporting quality for abstract title (18%), primary outcome measure (10%), and randomization (13%), blinding (15%), number of patients-analyzed (28%) and outcome (40%). There was no reported trial registration or funding at all. The median point per abstract was 7 (range = 4-14); there was no significant difference between these years.
Conclusion: The overall quality of RCT abstracts presented at the Turkish National Surgical Congresses appears to be poor and should be improved for clear, transparent, and detailed information to be transferred.
Keywords:
Randomized controlled trial, abstracts, data reporting, quality
References
1Latronico N, Botteri M, Minelli C, Zanotti C, Bertolini G, Candiani A. Quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials in the intensive care literature. A systematic analysis of papers published in Intensive Care Medicine over 26 years. Intensive Care Med 2002; 28: 1316-1323. DOI: 10.1007/s00134-002-1339-x
2Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D; CONSORT Group. CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. J Clin Epidemiol 2010; 63: 834-840. DOI:10.1186/1745- 6215-11-32
3Berwanger O, Ribeiro RA, Finkelsztejn A, Watanabe M, Suzumura EA, Duncan BB, Devereaux PJ, Cook D. The qualit y of reporting of trial abstracts is suboptimal: survey of major general medical journals. J Clin Epidemiol 2009; 62: 387-392. DOI:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.05.013
4Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, Horton R, Moher D, Olkin I, Pitkin R, Rennie D, Schulz KF, Simel D, Stroup DF. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized c ontrolled trials. The CONSORT statement. JAMA 1996; 276: 637–639.
5Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D, Egger M, Davidoff F, Elbourne D, Gøtzsche PC, Lang T; CONSORT GROUP (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials). The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2001; 134: 663-694.
6Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gøtzsche PC, Devereaux PJ, Elbourne D, Egger M, Altman DG; Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Group. CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. J Clin Epidemiol 2010; 63: 1-37. DOI:10.1016/j. jclinepi.2010.03.004
7Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, Fergusson D. CONSORT 2010 changes and testing blindness in RCTs. Lancet 2010; 375: 1144-1146. DOI:10.1016/S0140- 6736(10)60413-8
8Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ, Mc- Quay HJ. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996; 17: 1–12. DOI:10.1016/0197-2456(95)00134-4
9Bernal-Delgado E, Fisher ES. Abstracts in high profile journals often fail to report harm. BMC Med Res Methodol 2008; 8: 14. DOI:10.1186/1471-2288-8-14
10Burns KE, Adhikari NK, Kho M, Meade MO, Patel RV, Sinuff T, Cook DJ. Abstract reporting in randomized clinical trials of acute lung injury: An audit and assessment of a quality of reporting score. Crit Care Med 2005; 33: 1937-1945. DOI:10.1097/01. CCM.0000178361.73895.24
11Moher D, Jones A, Lepage L; CONSORT Group (Consolitdated Standarts for Reporting of Trials). Use of the CONSORT statement and quality of reports of randomized trials: a comparative before-andafter evaluation. JAMA 2001; 285: 1992- 1995. DOI:10.1001/jama.285.15.1992
12Greenfield ML, Mhyre JM, Mashour GA, Blum JM, Yen EC, Rosenberg AL. Improvement in the quality of randomized controlled trials among general anesthesiology journals 2000 to 2006: a 6-year follow-up. Anesth Analg 2009; 108: 1916 –1921. DOI:10.1213/ ane.0b013e31819fe6d7
13Chung GY. Sentence retrieval for abstracts of randomized controlled trials. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2009; 9: 10. DOI:10.1186/1472-6947-9-10
14Wong HL, Truong D, Mahamed A, Davidian C, Rana Z, Einarson TR. Quality of structured abstracts of original research articles in the British Medical Journal, the Canadian Medical Association Journal and the Journal of the American Medical Association: a 10-year follow-up study. Curr Med Res Opin 2005; 21: 467-473. DOI:10.1185/030079905X38123
15Hopewell S, Clarke M, Moher D, Wager E, Middleton P, Altman DG, Schulz KF; CONSORT Group. CONSORT for reporting randomised trials in journal and conference abstracts. Lancet 2008; 371: 281-
16DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61835-2
17Ulusal Cerrahi Kongresi, Bildiri Özet Kitabı; 26-30 Mayıs 2004.
18Ulusal Cerrahi Kongresi, Bildiri Özet Kitabı; 24-28 Mayıs 2006.
19Ulusal Cerrahi Kongresi, Bildiri Özet Kitabı; 28 Mayıs-1 Haziran 2008.
20Hopewell S, Clarke M, Moher D, Wager E, Middleton P, Altman DG, Schulz KF; CONSORT Group. CONSORT for reporting randomized controlled trials in journal and conference abstracts: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med 2008; 5: e20. DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61835-2
21Alvarez F, Meyer N, Gourraud PA, Paul C. CONSORT adoption and quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials: a systematic analysis in two dermatology journals. Br J Dermatol 2009; 161: 1159-1165. DOI:10.1111/j.1365- 2133.2009.09382.x
22Balasubramanian SP, Wiener M, Alshameeri Z, Tiruvoipati R, Elbourne D, Reed MW. Standards of reporting of randomized controlled trials in general surgery: can we do better? Ann Surg 2006; 244: 663-667. DOI:10.1097/01. sla.0000217640.11224.05
23Hopewell S, Clarke M, Askie L. Reporting of trials presented in conference abstracts needs to be improved. J Clin Epidemiol 2006; 59: 681-684. DOI:10.1016/j. jclinepi.2005.09.016
24Can OS, Yilmaz AA, Hasdogan M, Alkaya F, Turhan SC, Can MF, Alanoglu Z. Has the quality of abstracts for randomised controlled trials improved since the release of Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trial guideline for abstract reporting? A survey of four high-profile anaesthesia journals. Eur J Anaesthesiol, 2010 Oct 28. [Epub ahead of print]
25Can MF. Randomize kontrollü çalışma özetlerinin kalitesi CONSORT kılavuzu sonrasında arttı mı? Önde gelen uluslararası genel cerrahi dergileri için bir ‘önce ve sonra’ değerlendirmesi. 17. Ulusal Cerrahi Kongre Kitabı. 26 – 29 Mayıs 2010.
26Autorino R, Borges C, White MA, Altunrende F, Perdoná S, Haber GP, De Sio M, Khanna R, Stein RJ, Kaouk JH. Randomized clinical trials presented at the world congress of endourology: how is the quality of reporting? J Endourol 2010; 24: 2067-2073. DOI:10.1089/ end.2009.0541
27Yoon U, Knobloch K. Quality of reporting in sports injury prevention abstracts according to the CONSORT and STROBE criteria: an analysis of the World Congress of Sports Injury Prevention in 2005 and 2008. Br J Sports Med 2010 Jul 20. [Epub ahead of print]
