Has the reporting quality of published randomised controlled trial protocols improved since the SPIRIT statement? A methodological study
Has the reporting quality of published randomised controlled trial protocols improved since the SPIRIT statement? A methodological study
复制标题
DOI:
10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038283
复制
发表时间:
2020-08-01
期刊:
影响因子:
2.9
通讯作者:
Adie, Sam
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
Tan, Zet Wei;Tan, Aidan Christopher;Adie, Sam
Objectives To determine the reporting quality of published randomised controlled trial (RCT) protocols before and after the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) statement (2013), and any association with author, trial or journal factors. Design Methodological study. Data sources MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL were electronically searched using optimised search strategies. Eligibility criteria Protocols written for an RCT of living humans, published in full text in a peer-reviewed journal and published in the English language. Main outcome Primary outcome was the overall proportion of checklist items which were adequately reported in RCT protocols published before and after the SPIRIT statement. Results 300 RCT protocols were retrieved; 150 from the period immediately before the SPIRIT statement (9 July 2012 to 28 December 2012) and 150 from a recent period after the SPIRIT statement (25 January 2019 to 20 March 2019). 47.9% (95% CI, 46.5% to 49.3%) of checklist items were adequately reported in RCT protocols before the SPIRIT statement and 56.7% (95% CI, 54.9% to 58.5%) after the SPIRIT statement. This represents an 8.8% (95% CI, 6.6% to 11.1%; p