PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
August 28, 1996JAMA3,158 citations

Improving the Quality of Reporting of Randomized Controlled Trials

View Full Paper
CBColin B. BeggMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

Key Points

  • Address persistent reporting deficiencies in randomized controlled trials to ensure accurate assessment of internal and external validity.
  • Assessed historical reporting trends and gaps across 30 years of published randomized controlled trial literature.
  • Examined a cohort of 71 randomized controlled trials with negative results published between 1960 and 1975.
  • Demonstrated a consistent historical gap between necessary methodological reporting standards and actual published trial details.
  • Identified critical omissions in reported trial design, conduct, and analysis that impede objective evaluation of trial validity and generalizability.

Abstract

THE RANDOMIZED controlled trial (RCT), more than any other methodology, can have a powerful and immediate impact on patient care. Ideally, the report of such an evaluation needs to convey to the reader relevant information concerning the design, conduct, analysis, and generalizability of the trial. This information should provide the reader with the ability to make informed judgments regarding the internal and external validity of the trial. Accurate and complete reporting also benefits editors and reviewers in their deliberations regarding submitted manuscripts. For RCTs to ultimately benefit patients, the published report should be of the highest possible standard. For editorial comment see p 649. Evidence produced repeatedly over the last 30 years indicates a wide chasm between what a trial should report and what is actually published in the literature. In a review of 71 RCTs with negative results published between 1960 and 1975, the authors reported that the vast

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Colin B. Begg (1996) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0d53f088250cfcc2a4e095https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1996.03540080059030
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement1996 · 3,359 citations
  2. 2Better reporting of randomised controlled trials: the CONSORT statement1996 · 623 citations
  3. 3Randomized controlled trials – a matter of design2016 · 239 citations
  4. 4Quality of Reporting of Randomized Controlled Trials in General Endocrinology Literature2008 · 88 citations
  5. 5Reports of randomised control trials should begin and conclude with up-to-date systematic reviews of other relevant trials: a 25-year audit of the quality of trial reports2024 · 9 citations