Logo
    • English
    • Ελληνικά
    • Deutsch
    • français
    • italiano
    • español
  • English 
    • English
    • Ελληνικά
    • Deutsch
    • français
    • italiano
    • español
  • Login
View Item 
  •   University of Thessaly Institutional Repository
  • Επιστημονικές Δημοσιεύσεις Μελών ΠΘ (ΕΔΠΘ)
  • Δημοσιεύσεις σε περιοδικά, συνέδρια, κεφάλαια βιβλίων κλπ.
  • View Item
  •   University of Thessaly Institutional Repository
  • Επιστημονικές Δημοσιεύσεις Μελών ΠΘ (ΕΔΠΘ)
  • Δημοσιεύσεις σε περιοδικά, συνέδρια, κεφάλαια βιβλίων κλπ.
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
Institutional repository
All of DSpace
  • Communities & Collections
  • By Issue Date
  • Authors
  • Titles
  • Subjects

Assessment of the reporting quality of double-blind RCTs for ischemic stroke based on the CONSORT statement

Thumbnail
Author
Kodounis M., Liampas I.N., Constantinidis T.S., Siokas V., Mentis A.-F.A., Aloizou A.-M., Xiromerisiou G., Zintzaras E., Hadjigeorgiou G.M., Dardiotis E.
Date
2020
Language
en
DOI
10.1016/j.jns.2020.116938
Keyword
Article
brain ischemia
clinical assessment
funding
human
McNemar test
multivariate analysis
outcome assessment
priority journal
protocol compliance
quality control
randomized controlled trial (topic)
sample size
systematic review
brain ischemia
cerebrovascular accident
complication
controlled study
double blind procedure
randomized controlled trial
research
Brain Ischemia
Double-Blind Method
Humans
Ischemic Stroke
Research Report
Stroke
Elsevier B.V.
Metadata display
Abstract
Background-Purpose: It is critical that Randomized Controlled Trials(RCTs) present complete and transparent reporting. The present study aims to determine the reporting quality of double-blind RCTs for medicinal interventions in patients with ischemic stroke, based on the 2010 CONSORT-statement. Methodology: MEDLINE was comprehensively searched. The CONSORT period was demarcated between 2000 and 2019, while compliance ≥75 was defined as good-adequate. Possible determinants were univariately and multivariately examined for associations. Results: Overall, 197 articles were considered eligible, 143 published after and 54 before 2000. CONSORT compliance was 68.11% ± 11.56% (standard deviation) and 55.65% ± 11.57% respectively. Among retrieved articles 56/143(39.16%) and 1/54(1.85%) were rated as of good reporting quality correspondingly [p < .001, OR = 34.115, 95%CI = (4.586, 253.762)]. McNemar's test was indicative of consistency regarding the adequately/inadequately reported items before and after the 2010 CONSORT-revision (p = 1.00). Univariate analysis revealed two significant associations with the reporting quality: high impact factor(IF) [high vs. moderate; p = .007, OR = 3.521, 95%CI = (1.396, 8.879), high vs. low; p < .001, OR = 7.583, 95%CI = (3.063, 18.762), moderate vs. low; p = .078, OR = 2.154, 95%CI = (0.911, 5.093)] and sample size [p < .001, OR = 4.297, 95%CI = (2.081, 8.874)]. Publication period (p = .742) and funding (p = .280) were not significantly associated. Multivariate analysis attenuated the impact of sample size providing insignificant results, whereas the effect of high IF remained significant [moderate vs. high; p = .029, OR = 0.337, 95%CI = (0.127, 0.895), low vs. high; p = .012, OR = 0.199, 95%CI = (0.057, 0.699)]. An exploratory analysis demonstrated significant, weak to moderate, positive linear correlation between reporting quality and IF [Pearson's r = 0.418, p < .001]. Conclusions: Adherence to the CONSORT-statement needs to be further endorsed and incorporated in every journal's instructions-to-authors. © 2020 Elsevier B.V.
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/11615/74928
Collections
  • Δημοσιεύσεις σε περιοδικά, συνέδρια, κεφάλαια βιβλίων κλπ. [19735]
htmlmap 

 

Browse

All of DSpaceCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

My Account

LoginRegister (MyDspace)
Help Contact
DepositionAboutHelpContact Us
Choose LanguageAll of DSpace
EnglishΕλληνικά
htmlmap