Document Detail

Reporting of randomized clinical trial descriptors and use of structured abstracts.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  9676678     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
CONTEXT: Structured abstracts, that is, abstracts that describe a study using requisite content headings, provide more informative content. Concomitant reporting in the text of the report might improve with structured abstract use because of increased awareness by authors or editors of important study areas associated with content headings.
OBJECTIVE: To assess whether structured abstract use is associated with improved reporting of randomized clinical trials.
DESIGN AND SETTING: Survey of trial reports published the year preceding, of, and following new use of structured abstracts, found by hand searching Archives of Ophthalmology (1992-1994) and Ophthalmology (1991-1993), as well as trial reports published concurrently without change in abstract format (American Journal of Ophthalmology, 1991-1994).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We measured the inclusion of 56 criteria derived from Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) descriptors (JAMA 1996;276:637-639) in the text of each report and calculated the number of criteria included per report and the proportion of reports including individual criteria. Reports with structured abstracts were compared with those without, and reports published in 1993 and 1994 in the American Journal of Ophthalmology were compared with those published in 1991 and 1992.
RESULTS: The mean (SEM) number of criteria included by authors was 15.8 (0.4) per report in 125 trial reports. We found no difference in the mean number of criteria included or the proportion of reports that included specific criteria by journal. Following structured abstract use, there was no difference in either the mean number of criteria per report or the proportion of reports including a majority of criteria within each CONSORT subheading. Four criteria were included more often and 2 less often following structured abstract use in individual journals.
CONCLUSION: Using CONSORT descriptor criteria to evaluate reporting quality, we found no difference in text reporting associated with structured abstract use in the journals examined.
R W Scherer; B Crawley
Related Documents :
18350848 - Systematic reviews in orthodontics: what have we learned?
9676678 - Reporting of randomized clinical trial descriptors and use of structured abstracts.
20497518 - A systematic assessment of the quality of reporting for platelet transfusion studies.
23465508 - Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy and idiopathic cd4 lymphocytopenia.
7371478 - Retroperitoneal abscess. case report and review of the literature.
22470628 - Supernumerary testis.
Publication Detail:
Type:  Comparative Study; Journal Article    
Journal Detail:
Title:  JAMA     Volume:  280     ISSN:  0098-7484     ISO Abbreviation:  JAMA     Publication Date:  1998 Jul 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  1998-07-28     Completed Date:  1998-07-28     Revised Date:  2014-09-17    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  7501160     Medline TA:  JAMA     Country:  UNITED STATES    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  269-72     Citation Subset:  AIM; IM    
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Abstracting and Indexing as Topic / standards*
Periodicals as Topic / standards*
Publishing / standards*
Quality Control
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic / standards*
Comment In:
JAMA. 1999 Jan 6;281(1):34-5   [PMID:  9892444 ]
Erratum In:
JAMA 1998 Sep 23-30;280(12):1054

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Previous Document:  Can the accuracy of abstracts be improved by providing specific instructions? A randomized controlle...
Next Document:  Perceived value of providing peer reviewers with abstracts and preprints of related published and un...