advertising
-
1
Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, Altman DG. Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. .JAMA .1995. ;273::408.-12.
-
2
Moher D, Pham B, Jones A, Cook DJ, Jadad AR, Moher M, et al. Does quality of reports of randomized trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses. ?Lancet .1998. ;352::609.-13.
-
3
Jadad AR, Boyle M, Cunningham C, Kim M, Schachar R. Treatment of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 11 (Prepared by McMaster University under Contract No. 290-97-0017). Hamilton, Ontario: McMaster University; 2000..
-
4
Thornley B, Adams C. Content and quality of 2000 controlled trials in schizophrenia over 50 years. .BMJ .1998. ;317::1181.-4.
-
5
Hotopf M, Lewis G, Normand C. Putting trials on trial—the costs and consequences of small trials in depression: a systematic review of methodology. .J Epidemiol Community Health 1997. ;51::354.-8.
-
6
Dickinson K, Bunn F, Wentz R, Edwards P, Roberts I. Size and quality of randomized controlled trials in head injury: review of published studies. .BMJ .2000. ;320::1308.-11.
-
7
Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, Horton R, Moher D, Olkin I, et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement. .JAMA 1996. ;276::637.-9.
-
8
Freemantle N, Mason JM, Haines A, Eccles MP. CONSORT: an important step toward evidence-based health care. Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials [Editorial]. .Ann Intern Med .1997. ;126::81.-3.
-
9
Altman DG. Better reporting of randomised controlled trials: the CONSORT statement [Editorial]. .BMJ .1996. ;313::570.-1.
-
10
Schulz KF. The quest for unbiased research: randomized clinical trials and the CONSORT reporting guidelines. .Ann Neurol .1997. ;41::569.-73.
-
11
Huston P, Hoey J. CMAJ endorses the CONSORT statement. CONsolidation of Standards for Reporting Trials. .CMAJ .1996. ;155::1277.-82.
-
12
Davidoff F. News from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors [Editorial]. .Ann Intern Med .2000. ;133::229.-31.
-
13
CONSORT Statement. Available at www.consort-statement.org. Accessed 12 August 2000..
-
14
Moher D, Jones A, Lepage L. Use of the CONSORT statement and quality of reports of randomized trials: a comparative before and after evaluation? The CONSORT Group. JAMA. [In press]..
-
15
Egger M, Jüni P, Bartlett C. The value of patient flow charts in reports of randomized controlled trials: bibliographic study. The CONSORT Group. JAMA [In press]..
-
16
Meinert CL: Beyond CONSORT: need for improved reporting standards for clinical trials. Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials. .JAMA .1998. ;279::1487.-9.
-
17
Chalmers I. Current controlled trials: an opportunity to help improve the quality of clinical research. .Curr Control Trials Cardiovasc Med .2000. ;1::3.-8.
-
18
Bailar JC 3rd, Mosteller F. Guidelines for statistical reporting in articles for medical journals. Amplifications and explanations. .Ann Intern Med .1988. ;108::266.-73.
-
19
Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D, Egger M, Davidoff F, Elbourne D, et al. The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration. The CONSORT Group. .Ann Intern Med .2001. ;134::663.-94.
-
20
Elbourne DR, Campbell MK. Extending the CONSORT statement to cluster randomised trials: for discussion. .Stat Med .2001. ;20::489.-96.
-
21
Hollis S, Campbell F. What is meant by intention to treat analysis? Survey of published randomised controlled trials. .BMJ .1999. ;319::670.-4.
-
22
Ruiz-Canela M, Martinez-Gonzalez MA, de Irala-Estevez J. Intention to treat analysis is related to methodological quality [Letter]. .BMJ .2000. ;320::1007.-8.
-
23
Lee YJ, Ellenberg JH, Hirtz DG, Nelson KB. Analysis of clinical trials by treatment actually received: is it really an option. ?Stat Med .1991. ;10::1595.-605.
-
24
Bentzen SM. Towards evidence based radiation oncology: improving the design, analysis, and reporting of clinical outcome studies in radiotherapy. .Radiother Oncol .1998. ;46::5.-18.
-
25
O’Toole LB. Consort statement on the reporting standards of clinical trials. MRC uses checklist similar to CONSORT’s [Letter]. .BMJ .1997. ;314::1127..
-
26
Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses. .Lancet .1999. ;354::1896.-900.
-
27
Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, Olkin I, Williamson GD, Rennie D, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology (MOOSE) group. .JAMA 2000. ;283::2008.-12.
-
28
Siegel JE, Weinstein MC, Russell LB, Gold MR. Recommendations for reporting cost-effectiveness analyses. Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. .JAMA .1996. ;276::1339.-4l.
-
29
Neumann PJ, Stone PW, Chapman RH, Sandberg EA, Bell CM. The quality of reporting in published cost-utility analyses, 1976-1997. .Ann Intern Med .2000. ;132::964.-72.
-
30
Altman DG. The scandal of poor medical research [Editorial]. .BMJ .1994. ;308::283.-4.
The CONSORT Statement: Revised Recommendations for Improving the Quality of Reports of Parallel-Group Randomized Trials
Search for other papers by David Moher in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Kenneth F. Schulz in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Douglas G. Altman in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
To comprehend the results of a randomized, controlled trial (RCT), readers must understand its design, conduct, analysis, and interpretation. That goal can be achieved only through complete transparency from authors. Despite several decades of educational efforts, the reporting of RCTs needs improvement. Investigators and editors developed the original CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to help authors improve reporting by using a checklist and flow diagram. The revised CONSORT statement presented in this paper incorporates new evidence and addresses some criticisms of the original statement.
The checklist items pertain to the content of the Title, Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion. The revised checklist includes 22 items selected because empirical evidence indicates that not reporting the information is associated with biased estimates of treatment effect or because the information is essential to judge the reliability or relevance of the findings. We intended the flow diagram to depict the passage of participants through an RCT. The revised flow diagram depicts information from four stages of trial (enrollment, intervention allocation, follow-up, and analysis). The diagram explicitly includes the number of participants, for each intervention group, that are included in the primary data analysis. Inclusion of these numbers allows the reader to judge whether the authors have performed an intention-to-treat analysis.
In sum, the CONSORT statement is intended to improve the reporting of an RCT, enabling readers to understand a trial’s conduct and to assess the validity of its results. (J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 91(8): 437-442, 2001)
advertising
