Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Rheumatology International 9/2014

01.09.2014 | Original Article

Analysis of randomized controlled trials in Rheumatology International from 1981 to 2012: methodological assessment

verfasst von: Jeong Woo Lee, Jae Hoon Chung, Jung Ki Jo, Seung Wook Lee

Erschienen in: Rheumatology International | Ausgabe 9/2014

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

The aim of the study is to assess the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in Rheumatology International (RI) by using three types of analytical tools. MEDLINE was used to extract RCTs from original articles published in the RI from 1981 (vol. 1) to 2012 (vol. 32). The relationship between the number of articles and RCTs with time and that between various factors and the quality of RCTs were analyzed. To analyze the methodological quality of the RCTs, the time period was divided into several sections and three tools were applied (e.g., the Jadad scale, van Tulder scale, and Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool). The number of RCTs published gradually increased with time significantly (p < 0.001). The differences in RCT quality scores by each method in the publication years evaluated were not statistically significant, but RCTs that included descriptions of allocation concealment methods had received institutional review board (IRB) approval, and that conducted in the multicenter had significantly higher-quality scores than other studies. In conclusion, although the number of RCTs published in RI since its publishing in 1981 has increased with time, but no qualitative improvement of RCT was observed over time. It is necessary to improve the reporting of concealment of allocation, generation of randomization sequences, design of blinded studies, and obtaining IRB approval, all of which are criteria of high-quality RCTs.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Hatala R, Keitz S, Wyer P, Guyatt G (2005) Tips for learners of evidence-based medicine: 4. Assessing heterogeneity of primary studies in systematic reviews and whether to combine their results. Can Med Assoc J 172:661–665CrossRef Hatala R, Keitz S, Wyer P, Guyatt G (2005) Tips for learners of evidence-based medicine: 4. Assessing heterogeneity of primary studies in systematic reviews and whether to combine their results. Can Med Assoc J 172:661–665CrossRef
3.
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gotzsche PC, Devereaux PJ et al (2012) CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Int J Surg 10:28–55PubMedCrossRef Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gotzsche PC, Devereaux PJ et al (2012) CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Int J Surg 10:28–55PubMedCrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gøtzsche PC, Devereaux PJ et al (2010) CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 340:c869PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gøtzsche PC, Devereaux PJ et al (2010) CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 340:c869PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Newell SA, Sanson-Fisher RW, Savolainen NJ (2002) Systematic review of psychological therapies for cancer patients: overview and recommendations for future research. J Natl Cancer Inst 94:558–584PubMedCrossRef Newell SA, Sanson-Fisher RW, Savolainen NJ (2002) Systematic review of psychological therapies for cancer patients: overview and recommendations for future research. J Natl Cancer Inst 94:558–584PubMedCrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Hill J, Bullock I, Alderson P (2011) A summary of the methods that the National Clinical Guideline Centre uses to produce clinical guidelines for the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Ann Intern Med 154:752–757PubMedCrossRef Hill J, Bullock I, Alderson P (2011) A summary of the methods that the National Clinical Guideline Centre uses to produce clinical guidelines for the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Ann Intern Med 154:752–757PubMedCrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Chung JH, Lee SW (2013) Assessing the quality of randomized controlled urological trials conducted by Korean medical institutions. Korean J Urol 54:289–296 Chung JH, Lee SW (2013) Assessing the quality of randomized controlled urological trials conducted by Korean medical institutions. Korean J Urol 54:289–296
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Cho HJ, Chung JH, Jo JK, Kang DH, Cho JM, Yoo TK, Lee SW (2013) Assessments of the quality of randomized controlled trials published in International Journal of Urology from 1994 to 2011. Int J Urol. doi:10.1111/iju.12150 Cho HJ, Chung JH, Jo JK, Kang DH, Cho JM, Yoo TK, Lee SW (2013) Assessments of the quality of randomized controlled trials published in International Journal of Urology from 1994 to 2011. Int J Urol. doi:10.​1111/​iju.​12150
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ, McQuay HJ (1996) Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 17:1–12PubMedCrossRef Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ, McQuay HJ (1996) Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 17:1–12PubMedCrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat van Tulder M, Furlan A, Bombardier C, Bouter L (2003) Updated method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane collaboration back review group. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28:1290–1299 van Tulder M, Furlan A, Bombardier C, Bouter L (2003) Updated method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane collaboration back review group. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28:1290–1299
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Scales CD Jr, Norris RD, Keitz SA, Peterson BL, Preminger GM, Vieweg J, Dahm P (2007) A critical assessment of the quality of reporting of randomized, controlled trials in the urology literature. J Urol 177:1090–1094PubMedCrossRef Scales CD Jr, Norris RD, Keitz SA, Peterson BL, Preminger GM, Vieweg J, Dahm P (2007) A critical assessment of the quality of reporting of randomized, controlled trials in the urology literature. J Urol 177:1090–1094PubMedCrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Bridoux V, Moutel G, Roman H, Kianifard B, Michot F, Herve C, Tuech JJ (2012) Methodological and ethical quality of randomized controlled clinical trials in gastrointestinal surgery. J Gastrointest Surg 16:1758–1767PubMedCrossRef Bridoux V, Moutel G, Roman H, Kianifard B, Michot F, Herve C, Tuech JJ (2012) Methodological and ethical quality of randomized controlled clinical trials in gastrointestinal surgery. J Gastrointest Surg 16:1758–1767PubMedCrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, Altman DG (1995) Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA 273:408–412PubMedCrossRef Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, Altman DG (1995) Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA 273:408–412PubMedCrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Chan AW, Altman DG (2005) Epidemiology and reporting of randomised trials published in PubMed journals. Lancet 365:1159–1162PubMedCrossRef Chan AW, Altman DG (2005) Epidemiology and reporting of randomised trials published in PubMed journals. Lancet 365:1159–1162PubMedCrossRef
20.
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Mills EJ, Wu P, Gagnier J, Gagnier J, Devereaux PJ (2005) The quality of randomized trial reporting in leading medical journals since the revised CONSORT statement. Contemp Clin Trials 26:480–487PubMedCrossRef Mills EJ, Wu P, Gagnier J, Gagnier J, Devereaux PJ (2005) The quality of randomized trial reporting in leading medical journals since the revised CONSORT statement. Contemp Clin Trials 26:480–487PubMedCrossRef
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Peron J, Pond GR, Gan HK, Chen EX, Almufti R, Maillet D, You B (2012) Quality of reporting of modern randomized controlled trials in medical oncology: a systematic review. J Natl Cancer Inst 104:982–989PubMedCrossRef Peron J, Pond GR, Gan HK, Chen EX, Almufti R, Maillet D, You B (2012) Quality of reporting of modern randomized controlled trials in medical oncology: a systematic review. J Natl Cancer Inst 104:982–989PubMedCrossRef
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Chung JH, Lee JW, Jo JK, Kim KS, Lee SW (2013) A quality analysis of randomized controlled trials about erectile dysfunction. World J Mens Health 31:157–162PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Chung JH, Lee JW, Jo JK, Kim KS, Lee SW (2013) A quality analysis of randomized controlled trials about erectile dysfunction. World J Mens Health 31:157–162PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Jo JK, Autorino R, Chung JH, Kim KS, Lee JW, Baek EJ, Lee SW (2013) Randomized controlled trials in endourology: a quality assessment. J Endourol 27:1055–1060PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Jo JK, Autorino R, Chung JH, Kim KS, Lee JW, Baek EJ, Lee SW (2013) Randomized controlled trials in endourology: a quality assessment. J Endourol 27:1055–1060PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Huwiler-Muntener K, Juni P, Junker C, Egger M (2002) Quality of reporting of randomized trials as a measure of methodologic quality. JAMA 287:2801–2804PubMedCrossRef Huwiler-Muntener K, Juni P, Junker C, Egger M (2002) Quality of reporting of randomized trials as a measure of methodologic quality. JAMA 287:2801–2804PubMedCrossRef
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Wood L, Egger M, Gluud LL, Schulz KF, Juni P, Altman DG et al (2008) Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ 336:601–605PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Wood L, Egger M, Gluud LL, Schulz KF, Juni P, Altman DG et al (2008) Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ 336:601–605PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Analysis of randomized controlled trials in Rheumatology International from 1981 to 2012: methodological assessment
verfasst von
Jeong Woo Lee
Jae Hoon Chung
Jung Ki Jo
Seung Wook Lee
Publikationsdatum
01.09.2014
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Rheumatology International / Ausgabe 9/2014
Print ISSN: 0172-8172
Elektronische ISSN: 1437-160X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-014-2963-9

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 9/2014

Rheumatology International 9/2014 Zur Ausgabe

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Mit medbee Pocketcards sicher entscheiden.

Seit 2022 gehört die medbee GmbH zum Springer Medizin Verlag

Update Innere Medizin

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.