Assessing the reporting quality of pediatric neuro-oncology protocols, abstracts, and trials: Adherence to the SPIRIT

Joshua S Suppree1,2, Sophia Hart2, Sumirat M Keshwara2

  • 1School of Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.

Neuro-Oncology Practice
|September 16, 2024
PubMed

Insights

Reporting quality for pediatric neuro-oncology clinical trial protocols and results needs improvement, especially in randomization and blinding. This study assessed adherence to SPIRIT and CONSORT guidelines.

Area of Science:

  • Oncology
  • Clinical Trials
  • Methodology

Background:

  • Comprehensive reporting of clinical trial activity is crucial.
  • SPIRIT 2013 and CONSORT 2010 statements guide reporting for protocols and results, respectively.
  • Assessing reporting quality in pediatric neuro-oncology is essential.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the reporting quality of pediatric neuro-oncology trial protocols.
  • To assess the reporting quality of pediatric neuro-oncology trial result articles.
  • To identify areas for improvement in trial reporting.

Main Methods:

  • Methodological review of published pediatric brain tumor trial protocols and phase II/III result articles.
  • Searches conducted across 4 electronic bibliographic databases.
  • Assessment using SPIRIT 2013, CONSORT 2010, and CONSORT-A checklists.

Main Results:

  • Nine trial protocols, 68 phase II, and 8 phase III result articles were analyzed.
  • Mean adherence to SPIRIT for protocols was 76.8%.
  • Adherence to CONSORT for phase II and III results was 71.3% and 70.3%, respectively. Abstract adherence to CONSORT-A was lower (67.4% for phase II, 47.5% for phase III).

Conclusions:

  • Pediatric neuro-oncology trial reporting quality requires enhancement.
  • Areas needing improvement include randomization and blinding.
  • Findings align with previous assessments of adult neuro-oncology trial reporting.
Abstract