Reporting randomized, controlled trials: where quality of reporting may be improved

Area of Science:

• Clinical research methodology
• Surgical reporting standards
• Evidence-based medicine

Background:

• High-quality reporting is crucial for evidence-based medicine.
• Previous studies show room for improvement in clinical trial reporting.
• This study assesses reporting quality in colorectal surgery journals.

Purpose of the Study:

• Evaluate reporting quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in Diseases of the Colon and Rectum.
• Identify specific areas for improvement in RCT reporting.
• Compare reporting quality with other major surgical and medical journals.

Main Methods:

• Two independent evaluators assessed RCTs published in Diseases of the Colon and Rectum in 1990, 1995, and 2000.
• RCTs from Annals of Surgery, Archives of Surgery, and Gastroenterology were also assessed for 2000.
• Reporting frequency of 11 key design and analysis elements was determined.

Main Results:

• Reporting quality in Diseases of the Colon and Rectum improved from 60% in 1990 to 77% in 2000.
• Eligibility criteria, statistical tests, and loss to follow-up were well-reported.
• Statistical power calculations were reported in only 11% of 2000 RCTs, a significantly underreported item.

Conclusions:

• While reporting quality in Diseases of the Colon and Rectum is improving, specific elements require attention.
• Underreporting of statistical power calculations hinders the interpretation of RCT results.
• Adherence to reporting guidelines for key elements, especially power calculations, can enhance overall study quality in colorectal surgery.