Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2005

Open Access 01-12-2005 | Research article

Effects of the search technique on the measurement of the change in quality of randomized controlled trials over time in the field of brain injury

Authors: Mark K Borsody, Chisa Yamada

Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology | Issue 1/2005

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

To determine if the search technique that is used to sample randomized controlled trial (RCT) manuscripts from a field of medical science can influence the measurement of the change in quality over time in that field.

Methods

RCT manuscripts in the field of brain injury were identified using two readily-available search techniques: (1) a PubMed MEDLINE search, and (2) the Cochrane Injuries Group (CIG) trials registry. Seven criteria of quality were assessed in each manuscript and related to the year-of-publication of the RCT manuscripts by regression analysis.

Results

No change in the frequency of reporting of any individual quality criterion was found in the sample of RCT manuscripts identified by the PubMed MEDLINE search. In the RCT manuscripts of the CIG trials registry, three of the seven criteria showed significant or near-significant increases over time.

Conclusions

We demonstrated that measuring the change in quality over time of a sample of RCT manuscripts from the field of brain injury can be greatly affected by the search technique. This poorly recognized factor may make measurements of the change in RCT quality over time within a given field of medical science unreliable.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Working Group on Recommendations for Reporting of Clinical Trials in the Biomedical Literature Group: Call for comments on a proposal to improve reporting of clinical trials in the biomedical literature: a position paper. Ann Intern Med. 1994, 121: 894-95.CrossRef Working Group on Recommendations for Reporting of Clinical Trials in the Biomedical Literature Group: Call for comments on a proposal to improve reporting of clinical trials in the biomedical literature: a position paper. Ann Intern Med. 1994, 121: 894-95.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference The Standards of Reporting Trials Group: A proposal for structured reporting of randomized controlled trials. JAMA. 1994, 272: 1926-31. 10.1001/jama.272.24.1926.CrossRef The Standards of Reporting Trials Group: A proposal for structured reporting of randomized controlled trials. JAMA. 1994, 272: 1926-31. 10.1001/jama.272.24.1926.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Weiner JP, Gibson G, Munster AM: Use of prophylactic antibiotics in surgical procedures: peer review guidelines as a method for quality assurance. Am J Surg. 1980, 139: 348-51. 10.1016/0002-9610(80)90291-3.CrossRefPubMed Weiner JP, Gibson G, Munster AM: Use of prophylactic antibiotics in surgical procedures: peer review guidelines as a method for quality assurance. Am J Surg. 1980, 139: 348-51. 10.1016/0002-9610(80)90291-3.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Chalmers TC, Smith H, Blackburn B, Silverman B, Schroeder B, Reitman D, Ambroz A: A method for assessing the quality of a randomized control trial. Control Clin Trials. 1981, 2: 31-49. 10.1016/0197-2456(81)90056-8.CrossRefPubMed Chalmers TC, Smith H, Blackburn B, Silverman B, Schroeder B, Reitman D, Ambroz A: A method for assessing the quality of a randomized control trial. Control Clin Trials. 1981, 2: 31-49. 10.1016/0197-2456(81)90056-8.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference MacKenzie CR, Charlson ME: Standards for the use of ordinal scales in clinical trials. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1986, 292: 40-3.CrossRef MacKenzie CR, Charlson ME: Standards for the use of ordinal scales in clinical trials. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1986, 292: 40-3.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Zelen M: Guidelines for publishing papers on cancer clinical trials: responsibilities of editors and authors. J Clin Oncol. 1983, 1: 164-9.PubMed Zelen M: Guidelines for publishing papers on cancer clinical trials: responsibilities of editors and authors. J Clin Oncol. 1983, 1: 164-9.PubMed
7.
go back to reference Gehlbach SH: "Interpreting the Medical Literature". 2002, New York: McGraw-Hill Company, 4 Gehlbach SH: "Interpreting the Medical Literature". 2002, New York: McGraw-Hill Company, 4
8.
go back to reference Moher D, Jadad AR, Nichol G, Penman M, Tugwell P, Walsh S: Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: an annotated bibliography of scales and checklists. Control Clin Trials. 1995, 16: 62-73. 10.1016/0197-2456(94)00031-W.CrossRefPubMed Moher D, Jadad AR, Nichol G, Penman M, Tugwell P, Walsh S: Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: an annotated bibliography of scales and checklists. Control Clin Trials. 1995, 16: 62-73. 10.1016/0197-2456(94)00031-W.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Jadad A: "Randomized Controlled Trials.". 1998, Plymouth: Latimer Trend & Company Jadad A: "Randomized Controlled Trials.". 1998, Plymouth: Latimer Trend & Company
10.
go back to reference Dickersin K, Scherer R, Lefebvre C: Identifying relevant studies for systematic reviews. B M J. 1994, 309: 1286-91.CrossRef Dickersin K, Scherer R, Lefebvre C: Identifying relevant studies for systematic reviews. B M J. 1994, 309: 1286-91.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Chalmers TC, Levin H, Sacks HS, Reitman D, Berrier J, Nagalingam R: Meta-analysis of clinical trials as a scientific discipline. I: Control of bias and comparison with large co-operative trials. Stat Med. 1987, 6: 315-28.CrossRefPubMed Chalmers TC, Levin H, Sacks HS, Reitman D, Berrier J, Nagalingam R: Meta-analysis of clinical trials as a scientific discipline. I: Control of bias and comparison with large co-operative trials. Stat Med. 1987, 6: 315-28.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Chan AW, Hrobjartsson A, Haahr MT, Gotzsche PC, Altman DG: Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials. JAMA. 2004, 291: 2457-2465. 10.1001/jama.291.20.2457.CrossRefPubMed Chan AW, Hrobjartsson A, Haahr MT, Gotzsche PC, Altman DG: Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials. JAMA. 2004, 291: 2457-2465. 10.1001/jama.291.20.2457.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, Horton R, Moher D, Olkin I, Pitkin R, Rennie D, Schulz KF, Simel D, Stroup DF: Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement. JAMA. 1996, 276: 637-9. 10.1001/jama.276.8.637.CrossRefPubMed Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, Horton R, Moher D, Olkin I, Pitkin R, Rennie D, Schulz KF, Simel D, Stroup DF: Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement. JAMA. 1996, 276: 637-9. 10.1001/jama.276.8.637.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman D: The CONSORT statement: Revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. JAMA. 2001, 285: 1987-1991. 10.1001/jama.285.15.1987.CrossRefPubMed Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman D: The CONSORT statement: Revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. JAMA. 2001, 285: 1987-1991. 10.1001/jama.285.15.1987.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Gehlbach SH: "Interpreting the Medical Literature". 2002, New York: McGraw-Hill Company, 4 Gehlbach SH: "Interpreting the Medical Literature". 2002, New York: McGraw-Hill Company, 4
16.
go back to reference van Tulder MW, Assendelft WJ, Koes BW, Bouter LM: Method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group for Spinal Disorders. Spine. 1997, 22: 2323-30. 10.1097/00007632-199710150-00001.CrossRefPubMed van Tulder MW, Assendelft WJ, Koes BW, Bouter LM: Method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group for Spinal Disorders. Spine. 1997, 22: 2323-30. 10.1097/00007632-199710150-00001.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Sackett DL, Gent M: Controversy in counting and attributing events in clinical trials. N Engl J Med. 1979, 301: 1410-2.CrossRefPubMed Sackett DL, Gent M: Controversy in counting and attributing events in clinical trials. N Engl J Med. 1979, 301: 1410-2.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Bulpitt CJ: "Randomised Controlled Clinical Trials.". 1983, Boston: Martinus Nijhoff PublishersCrossRef Bulpitt CJ: "Randomised Controlled Clinical Trials.". 1983, Boston: Martinus Nijhoff PublishersCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ, McQuay HJ: Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary?. Control Clin Trials. 1996, 17: 1-12. 10.1016/0197-2456(95)00134-4.CrossRefPubMed Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ, McQuay HJ: Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary?. Control Clin Trials. 1996, 17: 1-12. 10.1016/0197-2456(95)00134-4.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Kleinbaum DG, Kupper LL, Muller KE: "Applied Regression Analysis and Other Multivariable Methods.". 1988, Boston: PWS-Kent Kleinbaum DG, Kupper LL, Muller KE: "Applied Regression Analysis and Other Multivariable Methods.". 1988, Boston: PWS-Kent
Metadata
Title
Effects of the search technique on the measurement of the change in quality of randomized controlled trials over time in the field of brain injury
Authors
Mark K Borsody
Chisa Yamada
Publication date
01-12-2005
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology / Issue 1/2005
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2288
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-5-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2005

BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2005 Go to the issue