Top

Trials

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Commentary

Are CONSORT checklists submitted by authors adequately reflecting what information is actually reported in published papers?

Authors: David Blanco, Alice M. Biggane, Erik Cobo, MiRoR network

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2018

Abstract

Background

Compulsory submission of a checklist from the relevant reporting guideline is one of the most widespread journal requirements aiming to improve completeness of reporting. However, the current suboptimal levels of adherence to reporting guidelines observed in the literature may indicate that this journal policy is not having a significant effect.

Findings

We explored whether authors provided the appropriate CONSORT checklist extension for their study and whether there were inconsistencies between what authors claimed on the submitted checklist and what was actually reported in the published paper. We randomly selected 12 randomized trials from three journals that provide the originally submitted checklist and analyzed six core CONSORT items. Only one paper used the appropriate checklist extension and had no inconsistencies between what was claimed in the submitted checklist and what was reported in the published paper.

Conclusion

Journals should take further actions to take full advantage of the requirement for the submission of fulfilled CONSORT checklists, thus ensuring that these checklists reflect what is reported in the manuscript.

Available only for authorised users

EQUATOR Network. Library for health research reporting. http://www.equator-network.org/resource-centre/library. Accessed 5 Jan 2018.

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(8):637–9.CrossRefPubMed

Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. Lancet (London, England). 2001;357(9263):1191–4.CrossRef

Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, CONSORT Group. CONSORT 2010 statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Int J Surg. 2011;9(8):672–7.CrossRefPubMed

Turner L, Shamseer L, Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D, et al. Does use of the CONSORT Statement impact the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials published in medical journals? A Cochrane review. Syst Rev. 2012;1(1):60.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Samaan Z, Mbuagbaw L, Kosa D, Borg Debono V, Dillenburg R, Zhang S, et al. A systematic scoping review of adherence to reporting guidelines in health care literature. J Multidiscip Healthc. 2013;6:169–88.PubMedPubMedCentral

Campbell MK, Piaggio G, Elbourne DR, Altman DG, CONSORT Group. Consort 2010 statement: extension to cluster randomised trials. BMJ. 2012;345:e5661.CrossRefPubMed

Boutron I, Moher D, Altman DG, Schulz KF, Ravaud P, CONSORT Group. Extending the CONSORT statement to randomized trials of nonpharmacologic treatment: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148(4):295–309.CrossRefPubMed

Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gøtzsche PC, Devereaux PJ, et al. CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63(8):e1–37.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Zwarenstein M, Treweek S, Gagnier JJ, Altman DG, Tunis S, Haynes B, et al. Improving the reporting of pragmatic trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement. BMJ. 2008;337:a2390.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JPA, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(10):e1–34.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Hirst A, Altman DG. Are peer reviewers encouraged to use reporting guidelines? A survey of 116 health research journals. PLoS One. 2012;7(4):e35621.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Hopewell S, Collins GS, Boutron I, Yu L-M, Cook J, Shanyinde M, et al. Impact of peer review on reports of randomised trials published in open peer review journals: retrospective before and after study. BMJ. 2014;349:g4145.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Title: Are CONSORT checklists submitted by authors adequately reflecting what information is actually reported in published papers?
Authors: David Blanco
Alice M. Biggane
Erik Cobo
MiRoR network
Publication date: 01-12-2018
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: Trials / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-018-2475-0

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Are CONSORT checklists submitted by authors adequately reflecting what information is actually reported in published papers?

Abstract

Background

Findings

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Findings

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Comparing dedicated and designated models of integrating mental health into chronic disease care: study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial

Non-invasive ventilation for the management of children with bronchiolitis (NOVEMBR): a feasibility study and core outcome set development protocol

When participants get involved: reconsidering patient and public involvement in clinical trials at the MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL

Improving cardiovascular health and quality of life in people with severe mental illness: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

The impact of manual rotation of the occiput posterior position on spontaneous vaginal delivery rate: study protocol for a randomized clinical trial (RMOS)

Surgical vs. non-surgical management of displaced type-2 odontoid fractures in patients aged 75 years and older: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial