مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Persian Verion

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

video

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

sound

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Persian Version

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

View:

2,127
مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Download:

0
مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Cites:

2

Information Journal Paper

Title

QUALITY ASSESSMENT OF RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS INDEXED IN PUBMED USING CONSORT STATEMENT

Pages

  406-415

Abstract

 Introduction: Most physicians consider ABSTRACTS to give a general idea about the full text of an article. ABSTRACTS, as summative and informative parts, contain main information of papers. They also point out the content of papers to readers. The importance of ABSTRACTS leads journals to be stricter about their structure and content. This study aimed to assess the ABSTRACTS of randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) indexed in PubMed according to Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist.Methods: In this descriptive cross-sectional study, we assessed all 314 ABSTRACTS of RCTs affiliated to Tehran University of Medical Sciences (n=249) and Iran University of Medical Sciences (n=65) indexed in PubMed up to the end of 2010. Data was presented in frequency tables and bar charts using SPSS16.Results: Among the items considered in the checklist, only the intervention used in the 2 groups has been completely presented in the ABSTRACTS. Other items about the method of randomization, type and design of the RCT, and the number of people involved in the analysis have been reported weakly. The drug interventions were the most common reported interventions (68.2%). In addition, double-blind was the most common blinding method.Conclusion: RCTs were not presented in high quality reports. Therefore, training courses about qualitative reporting of RCT results seem necessary for medical researchers. In addition, editors of medical journals must provide necessary reporting guidelines for authors and reviewers to improve the quality of published researches.

Cites

References

  • No record.
  • Cite

    APA: Copy

    AMANOLLAHI, ALIREZA, SHOKRANEH, FARHAD, MOHAMMADHASSANZADEH, HAFEZ, EBRAHIMI KALAN, MOHAMMAD, & BANANI, GHAZALEH. (2012). QUALITY ASSESSMENT OF RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS INDEXED IN PUBMED USING CONSORT STATEMENT. HEALTH INFORMATION MANAGEMENT, 9(3), 406-415. SID. https://sid.ir/paper/122183/en

    Vancouver: Copy

    AMANOLLAHI ALIREZA, SHOKRANEH FARHAD, MOHAMMADHASSANZADEH HAFEZ, EBRAHIMI KALAN MOHAMMAD, BANANI GHAZALEH. QUALITY ASSESSMENT OF RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS INDEXED IN PUBMED USING CONSORT STATEMENT. HEALTH INFORMATION MANAGEMENT[Internet]. 2012;9(3):406-415. Available from: https://sid.ir/paper/122183/en

    IEEE: Copy

    ALIREZA AMANOLLAHI, FARHAD SHOKRANEH, HAFEZ MOHAMMADHASSANZADEH, MOHAMMAD EBRAHIMI KALAN, and GHAZALEH BANANI, “QUALITY ASSESSMENT OF RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS INDEXED IN PUBMED USING CONSORT STATEMENT,” HEALTH INFORMATION MANAGEMENT, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 406–415, 2012, [Online]. Available: https://sid.ir/paper/122183/en

    Related Journal Papers

    Related Seminar Papers

  • No record.
  • Related Plans

  • No record.
  • Recommended Workshops






    Move to top
    telegram sharing button
    whatsapp sharing button
    linkedin sharing button
    twitter sharing button
    email sharing button
    email sharing button
    email sharing button
    sharethis sharing button