A systematic evaluation of the impact of STRICTA and CONSORT recommendations on quality of reporting for acupuncture trials

Meta-research on reporting guidelines for artificial intelligence: are authors and reviewers encouraged enough in radiology, nuclear medicine, and medical imaging journals?

PURPOSE

To determine how radiology, nuclear medicine, and medical imaging journals encourage and mandate the use of reporting guidelines for artificial intelligence (AI) in their author and reviewer instructions.

METHODS

The primary source of journal information and associated citation data used was the Journal Citation Reports (June 2023 release for 2022 citation data; Clarivate Analytics, UK). The first- and second-quartile journals indexed in the Science Citation Index Expanded and the Emerging Sources Citation Index were included. The author and reviewer instructions were evaluated by two independent readers, followed by an additional reader for consensus, with the assistance of automatic annotation. Encouragement and submission requirements were systematically analyzed. The reporting guidelines were grouped as AI-specific, related to modeling, and unrelated to modeling.

RESULTS

Out of 102 journals, 98 were included in this study, and all of them had author instructions. Only five journals (5%) encouraged the authors to follow AI-specific reporting guidelines. Among these, three required a filled-out checklist. Reviewer instructions were found in 16 journals (16%), among which one journal (6%) encouraged the reviewers to follow AI-specific reporting guidelines without submission requirements. The proportions of author and reviewer encouragement for AI-specific reporting guidelines were statistically significantly lower compared with those for other types of guidelines (P < 0.05 for all).

CONCLUSION

The findings indicate that AI-specific guidelines are not commonly encouraged and mandated (i.e., requiring a filled-out checklist) by these journals, compared with guidelines related to modeling and unrelated to modeling, leaving vast space for improvement. This meta-research study hopes to contribute to the awareness of the imaging community for AI reporting guidelines and ignite large-scale group efforts by all stakeholders, making AI research less wasteful.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

This meta-research highlights the need for improved encouragement of AI-specific guidelines in radiology, nuclear medicine, and medical imaging journals. This can potentially foster greater awareness among the AI community and motivate various stakeholders to collaborate to promote more efficient and responsible AI research reporting practices.

Acupuncture for patients after percutaneous coronary intervention: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the current available evidence and to outline recommendations for the future research of acupuncture for patients after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

DESIGN

Seven electronic databases were searched: China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wan Fang Database, Chongqing VIP Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database (VIP), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), Cochrane Library, PubMed, and EMBASE. All studies on acupuncture for patients after PCI were included. The search period was from the database establishment to June 13th, 2024.

SETTING

Using full-text and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) searches, two personnel independently screened and checked articles strictly according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and they reached an agreement through discussion on articles with different opinions.

INTERVENTIONS

Post-PCI acupuncture.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Creating descriptive charts to visually express the research features.

RESULTS

38 eligible studies were included. Their main topic was the use of acupuncture in patients after PCI. The primary focus of these studies was the application of acupuncture in patients post-PCI. The majority of the included articles originated from China, with the majority published in the year 2023. The types of studies encompassed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (25, 65.8 %), protocols (6, 15.8 %), review articles (6, 15.8 %), and case report (1, 2.6 %). The acupuncture methods utilized varied, with filiform needle therapy being the most common (14, 36.8 %), followed by auricular plaster therapy (7, 18.4 %), thumbtack needle therapy (7, 18.4 %), and eye acupuncture (1, 2.6 %). The acupoints most frequently used were Shenmen (TF4) in the auricular region and Neiguan (PC6). The needle retention time was predominantly 30 min, as reported in nine studies involving filiform needles. In the control groups of the included studies, secondary prevention measures were most commonly employed, appearing in thirteen studies. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) was the most frequently measured outcome, featured in nine studies. Psychological issues were identified as the most prevalent condition following PCI, mentioned in seventeen studies.

CONCLUSION

The main focus of this scoping review was on psychological issues, cardiovascular problems, and exercise capacity or quality of life of patients after PCI. The majority of research has concentrated on psychological and cardiovascular issues. However, the outcomes related to varieties of acupuncture therapy methods, acupoints selection, retention time, treatment frequency, and other aspects of acupuncture practice were interconnected and complex within the clinical application of acupuncture. These interconnected elements collectively impacted the treatment of acupuncture in the post-PCI context, making it challenging to reach definitive conclusions. The heterogeneity in acupuncture practices highlighted the need for future research. It is recommended that future studies employ more rigorous designs, standardized methodologies, larger sample sizes, and higher quality to enhance our understanding of acupuncture's role in post-PCI care. This is particularly important for elucidating its potential in addressing psychological and cardiovascular problems, which are critical areas of concern for patients post-PCI.

REGISTRATION

This scoping review has been registered in the Open Science Framework Registry (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/3HZFW). We drafted this paper following the PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) (https://www.prisma-statement.org/scoping) (Appendix 1).

Self-reported checklists and quality scoring tools in radiomics: a meta-research

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the use of reporting checklists and quality scoring tools for self-reporting purposes in radiomics literature.

METHODS

Literature search was conducted in PubMed (date, April 23, 2023). The radiomics literature was sampled at random after a sample size calculation with a priori power analysis. A systematic assessment for self-reporting, including the use of documentation such as completed checklists or quality scoring tools, was conducted in original research papers. These eligible papers underwent independent evaluation by a panel of nine readers, with three readers assigned to each paper. Automatic annotation was used to assist in this process. Then, a detailed item-by-item confirmation analysis was carried out on papers with checklist documentation, with independent evaluation of two readers.

RESULTS

The sample size calculation yielded 117 papers. Most of the included papers were retrospective (94%; 110/117), single-center (68%; 80/117), based on their private data (89%; 104/117), and lacked external validation (79%; 93/117). Only seven papers (6%) had at least one self-reported document (Radiomics Quality Score (RQS), Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD), or Checklist for Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging (CLAIM)), with a statistically significant binomial test (p < 0.001). Median rate of confirmed items for all three documents was 81% (interquartile range, 6). For quality scoring tools, documented scores were higher than suggested scores, with a mean difference of - 7.2 (standard deviation, 6.8).

CONCLUSION

Radiomic publications often lack self-reported checklists or quality scoring tools. Even when such documents are provided, it is essential to be cautious, as the accuracy of the reported items or scores may be questionable.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

Current state of radiomic literature reveals a notable absence of self-reporting with documentation and inaccurate reporting practices. This critical observation may serve as a catalyst for motivating the radiomics community to adopt and utilize such tools appropriately, thereby fostering rigor, transparency, and reproducibility of their research, moving the field forward.

KEY POINTS

• In radiomics literature, there has been a notable absence of self-reporting with documentation. • Even if such documents are provided, it is critical to exercise caution because the accuracy of the reported items or scores may be questionable. • Radiomics community needs to be motivated to adopt and appropriately utilize the reporting checklists and quality scoring tools.

Consolidated Reporting Guidelines for Prognostic and Diagnostic Machine Learning Modeling Studies: Development and Validation

BACKGROUND

The reporting of machine learning (ML) prognostic and diagnostic modeling studies is often inadequate, making it difficult to understand and replicate such studies. To address this issue, multiple consensus and expert reporting guidelines for ML studies have been published. However, these guidelines cover different parts of the analytics lifecycle, and individually, none of them provide a complete set of reporting requirements.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to consolidate the ML reporting guidelines and checklists in the literature to provide reporting items for prognostic and diagnostic ML in in-silico and shadow mode studies.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search that identified 192 unique peer-reviewed English articles that provide guidance and checklists for reporting ML studies. The articles were screened by their title and abstract against a set of 9 inclusion and exclusion criteria. Articles that were filtered through had their quality evaluated by 2 raters using a 9-point checklist constructed from guideline development good practices. The average κ was 0.71 across all quality criteria. The resulting 17 high-quality source papers were defined as having a quality score equal to or higher than the median. The reporting items in these 17 articles were consolidated and screened against a set of 6 inclusion and exclusion criteria. The resulting reporting items were sent to an external group of 11 ML experts for review and updated accordingly. The updated checklist was used to assess the reporting in 6 recent modeling papers in JMIR AI. Feedback from the external review and initial validation efforts was used to improve the reporting items.

RESULTS

In total, 37 reporting items were identified and grouped into 5 categories based on the stage of the ML project: defining the study details, defining and collecting the data, modeling methodology, model evaluation, and explainability. None of the 17 source articles covered all the reporting items. The study details and data description reporting items were the most common in the source literature, with explainability and methodology guidance (ie, data preparation and model training) having the least coverage. For instance, a median of 75% of the data description reporting items appeared in each of the 17 high-quality source guidelines, but only a median of 33% of the data explainability reporting items appeared. The highest-quality source articles tended to have more items on reporting study details. Other categories of reporting items were not related to the source article quality. We converted the reporting items into a checklist to support more complete reporting.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings supported the need for a set of consolidated reporting items, given that existing high-quality guidelines and checklists do not individually provide complete coverage. The consolidated set of reporting items is expected to improve the quality and reproducibility of ML modeling studies.

Reporting and data-sharing level of acupuncture randomised controlled trials: a cross-sectional study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) play an important role in evidence-based medicine. However, an article with low reporting quality may mislead both experts and the general public into an erroneous decision. Data sharing can contribute to the truthfulness and transparency of trials. Acupuncture RCTs have been increasing rapidly these years, but the reporting quality and data-sharing level of acupuncture RCTs are not clear. Thus, this study will provide the current status of the reporting quality and data-sharing level of acupuncture RCTs.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A cross-sectional study will be conducted. The seven databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CBM, CNKI, Wanfang Database and VIP will be searched between 1 January 2012 and 15 October 2022 to identify acupuncture RCTs. The basic characteristics of included trials will be summarised. The reporting quality for included RCTs will be assessed by the Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials 2010 statement and the Standards for Reporting Interventions in Controlled Trials of Acupuncture. The data-sharing level will be assessed by open science practices.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval is not required for this study. This protocol has been registered in Open Science Framework Registries. The findings of this study will be submitted to a peer-reviewed academic journal.

ACURATE: A guide for reporting sham controls in trials using acupuncture

OBJECTIVE

To promote better reporting quality regarding sham acupuncture in clinical trials for a precise appraisal of the adequacy of the sham acupuncture procedure.

METHODS

A three-stage online Delphi survey was conducted to a group of experts. Items with higher than 80% consensus from the initial checklist were selected as the final candidates. Further discussion among the working group was convened to preclude potential redundancy among the items.

RESULTS

A total of 23 experts out of 35 (66%) responded to the Delphi process. The final checklist consists of 23 items in six categories: type of sham acupuncture, details of sham acupuncture manipulation, location of sham acupuncture, treatment regimen, practitioner, and protocol and settings.

CONCLUSION

This paper presents the Acupuncture Controls gUideline for Reporting humAn Trials and Experiments (ACURATE) checklist, an extension of The Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials (CONSORT) and to be used along with STandards for Reporting Interventions in Clinical Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA) when sham acupuncture needles are used in the study. This checklist focuses on a clear depiction of sham needling procedures to enhance replicability and enable a precise appraisal. We encourage researchers to use ACURATE in trials and reviews involving sham acupuncture to assist reporting sham acupuncture procedures and the related components.

STandards for Reporting Interventions in Clinical Trials Of Tuina/Massage (STRICTOTM): Extending the CONSORT statement

OBJECTIVES

Massage is a common therapy of nonpharmacological treatments, particularly in Tuina (Chinese massage) as its most common style, detailed guidance in reporting the intervention is warranted for its evaluation and replication. Based on the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials), we aimed to develop an Extension for Tuina/Massage, namely "The STandards for Reporting Interventions in Clinical Trials Of Tuina/Massage (STRICTOTM)."

METHODS

A group of professional clinicians, trialists, methodologists, developers of reporting guidelines, epidemiologists, statisticians, and editors has developed this STRICTOTM checklist through a standard methodology process recommended by the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency of Health Research) Network, including prospective registration, literature review, draft of the initial items, three rounds of the Delphi survey, consensus meeting, pilot test, and finalization of the guideline.

RESULTS

A checklist of seven items (namely Tuina/Massage rationale, details of Tuina/Massage, intervention regimen, other components of the intervention, Tuina/Massage provider background, control or comparator interventions, and precaution measures), and 16 subitems were developed. Explanations and examples (E&E) for each item are also provided.

CONCLUSIONS

The working group hopes that the STRICTOTM, in conjunction with both the CONSORT statement and extension for nonpharmacologic treatment, can improve the reporting quality and transparency of Tuina/Massage clinical research.

Reporting Eye-tracking Studies In DEntistry (RESIDE) checklist

OBJECTIVES

To (i) provide a scoping review of eye-tracking studies in dentistry, and (ii) propose a "Reporting Eye-tracking Studies in DEntistry" (RESIDE) checklist to facilitate standard reporting of eye-tracking studies.

DATA

A comprehensive search of six distinct electronic databases was undertaken.

SOURCES

Pubmed, OVID, Wed of Knowledge, Scopus, Cochrane and Google Scholar were used to identify studies that employed eye-tracking technology and dentistry as a subfield STUDY SELECTION: 42 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most studies exhibited several inconsistencies or failed to report on the appropriate items in the RESIDE checklist. These essential components include ethical approval, sample size calculation, location and setting, eye-tracking device attributes, participant calibration, sequence of events, and eye-tracking metrics (quantitative, qualitative and data details).

CONCLUSIONS

Evaluation of the published eye-tracking studies in this scoping review provides empirical data, highlighting the inconsistencies and limitations. Importantly, it illustrates the applicability of the RESIDE Checklist, which provides a comprehensive list of reporting elements to assist authors and reviewers of eye-tracking studies in dentistry. Also, RESIDE provides a framework to overcome critical issues to ensure high-quality scientific publications.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

A minimum threshold should be applied before accepting eye-tracking studies for publication in the future. RESIDE checklist promotes transparent and reproducible scientific communication about eye-tracking applications to dentistry. In addition, it provides a comprehensive list of reporting elements to assist authors and reviewers in ensuring high-quality scientific publications.

Reporting quality of sham needles used as controls in acupuncture trials: a methodological evaluation

OBJECTIVE

The description of controls is important in acupuncture clinical trials to interpret its effectiveness without fallacy. This paper aims to evaluate the reporting quality of acupuncture studies on the characteristics of sham needles.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Using a checklist developed from previously published reporting guidelines, the distribution of reported items and changes of reporting rates over time were investigated. Two-way ANOVA and linear regression were conducted.

RESULTS

Original articles of RCTs of any design involving sham needles as controls were eligible for assessment. 117 trials from three 2-year time periods between 2009 and 2018 were included. Seven items out of 25 were reported in more than 50% of the studies. While significant differences of reporting scores among categories were observed, there were no significant differences among time periods; no significant improvement was observed over time.

CONCLUSIONS

Low reporting qualities of sham needles used in acupuncture studies may influence how researchers understand the effectiveness of acupuncture. This study evaluated previous publications from 2009 to 2018 and found that reporting qualities on sham needles did not improve over time. Further studies are required to validate the items used in this study to endorse better reporting of controls in acupuncture trials.

Impacts of acupressure treatment on depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Depression is recognized as a major public health problem with a substantial impact on individuals and society. Complementary therapies such as acupressure may be considered a safe and cost-effective treatment for people with depression. An increasing body of research has been undertaken to assess the effectiveness of acupressure in various populations with depression, but the evidence thus far is inconclusive.

AIM

To examine the efficacy of acupressure on depression.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed on PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, Embase, MEDLINE, and China National Knowledge (CNKI). Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) or single-group trials in which acupressure was compared with control methods or baseline in people with depression were included. Data were synthesized using a random-effects or a fixed-effects model to analyze the impacts of acupressure treatment on depression and anxiety in people with depression. The primary outcome measures were set for depression symptoms. Subgroups were created, and meta-regression analyses were performed to explore which factors are relevant to the greater or lesser effects of treating symptoms.

RESULTS

A total of 14 RCTs (1439 participants) were identified. Analysis of the between-group showed that acupressure was effective in reducing depression [Standardized mean differences (SMDs) = -0.58, 95%CI: -0.85 to -0.32, P < 0.0001] and anxiety (SMD = -0.67, 95%CI: -0.99 to -0.36, P < 0.0001) in participants with mild-to-moderate primary and secondary depression. Subgroup analyses suggested that acupressure significantly reduced depressive symptoms compared with different controlled conditions and in participants with different ages, clinical conditions, and duration of intervention. Adverse events, including hypotension, dizziness, palpitation, and headache, were reported in one study.

CONCLUSION

The evidence of acupressure for mild-to-moderate depressive symptoms was significant. Importantly, the findings should be interpreted with caution due to study limitations. Future research with a well-designed mixed method is required to consolidate the conclusion and provide an in-depth understanding of potential mechanisms underlying the effects.

Nursing interventions of choice for the prevention and treatment of suicidal behaviour: The umbrella review protocol

AIM

To determine which interventions, from a nursing perspective, can be considered as the interventions of choice for the prevention and treatment of suicidal behaviour. In this way, the umbrella review attempts to identify nursing interventions from the Nursing Interventions Classification (NIC) taxonomy with evidence for this purpose.

DESIGN

Descriptive study protocol.

METHODS

This umbrella review will consist of an extensive, systematic search of published systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies examining interventions of choice for the prevention and treatment of suicidal behaviour. A systematic search of papers indexed in PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus, ISI Web of Knowledge and the Joanna Briggs Institute databases will be carried out; the results will be evaluated for inclusion by two independent reviewers. In addition, the bibliographic references of the included reviews will be searched. The assessment of the methodological quality of the included systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and data extraction, will be performed by two independent reviewers. Conflicts between reviewers will be resolved by an independent third reviewer. Research Ethics Committee approval is not required for this umbrella review.

RESULTS

We will determine which of the interventions identified as being of choice in the review are included in the Nursing Interventions Classification (NIC); they may be an effective therapeutic tool for nurses in the prevention and treatment of suicidal behaviour.

The Role of Acupuncture in Postoperative Pain Management of Patients Undergoing Knee Arthroplasty Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

»

Acupuncture after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) may decrease the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).

»

Acupuncture did not decrease visual analog scale (VAS) scores in the 0 to 48-hour interval but did decrease VAS scores at >48 hours after TKA.

»

The heterogeneity of the studies prevented meta-analysis of opioid use with acupuncture after TKA; a systematic review demonstrated mixed results.

»

Additional studies are needed to investigate opioid reduction with acupuncture after TKA.

An Evaluation of Reporting Guidelines and Clinical Trial Registry Requirements Among Addiction Medicine Journals

Context

Robust methodology and ethical reporting are paramount for quality scientific research, but recently, that quality in addiction research has been questioned. Avenues to improve such research quality include adherence to reporting guidelines and proper usage of clinical trial registries. Reporting guidelines and clinical trial registries have been shown to lead researchers to more ethical and transparent methodology.

Objectives

To investigate the reporting guideline and clinical trial registration policies of addiction research journals and identify areas of improvement.

Methods

We used Google Scholar Metrics' h-5 index to identify the top 20 addiction research journals. We then examined the instructions for authors from each journal to identify whether they required, recommended, or made no mention of trial registration and reporting guidelines, including the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT), Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE), Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses (QUOROM), Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), Standards for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD), Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE), Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE), Case Reports (CARE), Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS), Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR), Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence (SQUIRE), Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT), Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ), Transparent Reporting of a Multivariate Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD), Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P), and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) guidelines. We performed the same analysis regarding requirements for clinical trial registration.

Results

Of the 20 journals included in this study, 10 journals (50%) did not require adherence to any reporting guidelines. Trial registration followed a similar trend; 15 journals (75%) did not mention any form of trial or systematic review registration, and ClinicalTrials.gov was only recommended by only 1 journal (5%).

Conclusions

Among top addiction medicine journals, required adherence to reporting guidelines and clinical trial registry policies remains substandard. A step toward fulfilling the National Institute on Drug Abuses' call for improvement in transparency and reproducibility within addiction research should include all journals adopting a strict reporting guideline and clinical trial registry adherence policy.

The reporting quality and risk of bias of randomized controlled trials of acupuncture for migraine: Methodological study based on STRICTA and RoB 2.0

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the reporting quality and risk of bias of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of acupuncture for migraine, to facilitate and improve the quality of RCTs of acupuncture for migraine.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, PubMed and EMBASE were searched from inception to June 11, 2019 using a comprehensive search strategy. The reporting quality and risk of bias of included RCTs were independently evaluated by two investigators using STRICTA and RoB 2.0. Any disagreement was resolved by a third investigator.

RESULTS

A total of 28 eligible RCTs were published in 24 academic journals from 1994 to 2018. Based on STRICTA, four sub-items including "details of other interventions'' (1/28, 4 %), "setting and context of treatment" (9/28, 32 %), "the extent to which treatment was varied" (11/28, 39 %), and "number of needle insertions per subject per session" (13/28, 46 %), showed low reporting quality. A total of 32 different outcomes were reported in 28 RCTs, and based on RoB 2.0, nine (9/28, 32 %) RCTs were judged to be high RoB, three of which were owing to deviations from intended interventions; 11(11/28, 39 %) RCTs elicited some concerns; and eight (8/28, 29 %) RCTs were low RoB for their outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The reporting quality and risk of bias of RCTs of acupuncture for migraine remain suboptimal. Therefore, all stakeholders should make a contribution to improve the quality of RCTs of acupuncture for migraine using STRICTA and RoB 2.0, while not limiting this approach solely to studies on migraine, using STRICTA and RoB 2.0 tools.

Do acupuncture trials have lower risk of bias over the last five decades? A methodological study of 4 715 randomized controlled trials

Objective

To evaluate the change of the risk of bias (RoB) of acupuncture randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the past five decades.

Methods

Multiple databases were searched. We included RCTs identified from systematic reviews (SRs) on acupuncture. General characteristics and RoB judgment for each domain were extracted. The proportions of RCTs at high and unclear RoB were calculated and the changes were examined by the Mann-Kendall test.

Results

We included 368 SRs including 4 715 RCTs. The rates of RCTs at unclear RoB were the highest in allocation concealment (63%), and at the lowest in incomplete outcome data (35%); in the last five decades, statistically significant reductions were found for random sequence generation (P < 0.001) and selective reporting (P = 0.01), and increases for blinding of participants and personnel (P < 0.001), blinding of outcome assessment (P < 0.001) and incomplete outcome data (P = 0.04). For the proportions of RCTs at high RoB, blinding of participants and personnel (47%) and blinding of outcome assessment (35%) were the poorest domains; there were no significant differences in changes for all domains.

Conclusions

Although improvements concerning unclear risk were observed for random sequence generation and selective reporting, major issues remain for allocation concealment and blinding. It is imperative to use valid randomization, specify how it is conducted, and try to test for selection bias and the success of masking by using the Berger Exner test.

Standards for reporting interventions in clinical trials of cupping (STRICTOC): extending the CONSORT statement

BACKGROUND

The standards for reporting interventions in clinical trials of cupping (STRICTOC), in the form of a checklist and explanations for users, were designed to improve reporting of cupping trials, particularly the interventions, and thereby facilitating their interpretation and replication.

METHODS

A group of clinical experts, methodologists, epidemiologists, and editors has developed this STRICTOC checklist through a comprehensive process, including registration of this guideline, literature review, solicitation of comments, consensus meeting, revision, and finalization.

RESULTS

The STRICTOC checklist includes 6 items and 16 sub-items, namely cupping rationale, details of cupping, treatment regimen, other components of treatment, treatment provider background, and control or comparator interventions. Illustrative examples of each item are also provided.

CONCLUSIONS

It is intended that the STRICTOC, in conjunction with both the main Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement and extension for nonpharmacologic treatment, will raise the reporting quality of clinical trials of cupping.Trial registration We have registered this study on the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research (EQUATOR) Network: http://www.equator-network.org/library/reporting-guidelines-under-development/reporting-guidelines-under-development-for-clinical-trials/#STRICTOC.

Toward guidelines for reporting assistive technology device outcomes

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to develop and pilot-test reporting guidelines for manuscripts describing studies of assistive technology device outcomes, with the hopes of improving the overall quality of research in this field.

METHODS

The research is presented in two stages. In Stage 1, a literature review was completed to identify the essential components of a conceptual framework for reporting guidelines and to create a checklist. In Stage 2, two independent reviewers evaluated twenty articles using the checklist to identify any short-comings of the tool and produce an estimate of interrater reliability. Two items of the original checklist were revised after reconciling disagreements between the two raters.

RESULTS

The Cohen's Kappa value of the checklist was 0.887 (p < .000), reflecting excellent interrater agreement. The overall percent agreement was 94.6%.

CONCLUSIONS

Reporting guidelines for studies of assistive technology device outcomes appear to be reliable. Although the checklist may require periodic updating, it has potential for advancing outcomes research. Researchers are invited to share comments and criticisms to aid in the efforts of enhancing the quality of reporting in this field.Implications for rehabilitationReporting checklists and guidelines are effective tools for achieving a minimum standard of reporting quality in all areas of rehabilitation research.This study presents a preliminary reporting checklist for the field of assistive technology device outcomes that has potential for advancing outcomes research.Authors and journal editors are encouraged to adopt and adhere to reporting guidelines in order to enhance the clarity and completeness of prospective studies.

The effectiveness of acupuncture for pain reduction in delayed-onset muscle soreness: a systematic review

Objective:

The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature on acupuncture for delayed-onset muscle soreness (DOMS) and report upon study quality and treatment outcomes.

Design:

Systematic review.

Data sources:

Searches were conducted in the following electronic databases from their inception to 31 March 2018: CINAHL, MEDLINE, Allied and Complementary Medicine (AMED) and SPORTDiscus. Reference lists of all included studies and relevant reviews were hand-searched for additional studies.

Eligibility criteria for selecting studies:

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effectiveness of acupuncture in DOMS in adults measuring the pre-specified primary outcome (pain) were included.

Data collection and analysis:

Data were extracted using pre-defined extraction forms and the Standards for Reporting Interventions in Clinical Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA) checklist. Quality of studies was evaluated based on the Cochrane risk of bias assessment.

Results:

Five RCTs investigating laboratory-induced DOMS in the upper limbs with a total sample size of 182 healthy participants were included. Of the included studies, three reported superiority of acupuncture over no treatment in DOMS pain reduction as measured by visual analogue scale, pressure pain threshold or electrical pain threshold, while two studies yielded non-significant results. All studies demonstrated risk of bias in one or more areas, commonly lack of blinding of participants and personnel.

Summary/conclusion:

There is conflicting to limited evidence to support the effects of acupuncture on the relief of pain associated with DOMS. The findings were confounded by methodological limitations and reporting insufficiency. More rigorous, high-quality, and well-reported RCTs are required to further evaluate the effectiveness of acupuncture for DOMS.

A PRISMA assessment of the reporting quality of systematic reviews of nursing published in the Cochrane Library and paper-based journals

OBJECTIVE

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) was released as a standard of reporting systematic reviewers (SRs). However, not all SRs adhere completely to this standard. This study aimed to evaluate the reporting quality of SRs published in the Cochrane Library and paper-based journals.

METHODS

The SRs which evaluate the effectiveness of nursing interventions in 2016 were identified via PubMed. The reporting quality of selected articles was evaluated using the PRISMA checklist. For comparison, we divided these articles into Cochrane review (CR) and non-Cochrane review (NCR). Based on the satisfaction of the applicable criteria, each article is assigned an accumulated score and a total percentage score.

RESULTS

Overall, 41.7% articles were concentrated in 19.0 to 22.5 points which represent the moderate quality, 22% articles were high quality. There were still 36.5% articles with low quality. The mean PRISMA score was 20.54 ± 2.367 for CRs, and 18.81 ± 2.536 for NCRs. Although no significant difference was exit between overall CR and NCR scores, there were differences between items 1, 5, 8, 16, 23. Analysis indicated that CR was significantly associated with the overall PRISMA score.

CONCLUSION

Compliance of CR and NCR with PRISMA checklist exhibited different strengths and weaknesses. Our study underscores that nursing researchers should pay more attention to comprehensive reporting of SRs in nursing to follow the PRISMA statement.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING AND/OR HEALTH POLICY

Nursing researchers who participate in SRs should follow the latest Cochrane Handbook to prepare such study. Meanwhile, the PRISMA statement should be followed strictly to report SRs, so as to improve the quality of SRs.

Reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of acupuncture: the PRISMA for acupuncture checklist

Background

Acupuncture is widely used worldwide, and systematic reviews on acupuncture are increasingly being published. Although acupuncture systematic reviews share several essential elements with other systematic reviews, some essential information for the application of acupuncture is not covered by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Considering this, we aimed to develop an extension of the PRISMA statement for acupuncture systematic reviews.

Methods

We used the PRISMA statement as a starting point, and conducted this study referring to the development strategy recommended by the EQUATOR network. The initial items were collected through a wide survey among evidence users and a review of relevant studies. We conducted a three-round Delphi survey and one-day face-to-face meeting to select items and formulate the checklist. After the consensus meeting, we drafted the manuscript (including the checklist) and sent it to our advisory experts for comments, following which the checklist was refined and circulated to a group of acupuncture systematic review authors for pilot test. We also selected a sample of acupuncture systematic reviews published in 2017 to test the checklist.

Results

A checklist of five new sub-items (including sub items) and six modified items was formulated, involving content related to title, rationale, eligibility criteria, literature search, data extraction, and study characteristics. We clarified the rationales of the items and provided examples for each item for additional guidance.

Conclusion

The PRISMA for Acupuncture checklist is developed for improving the reporting of systematic reviews of acupuncture interventions.

Trial registration

We have registered the study on the EQUATOR network (http://www.equator-network.org/library/reporting-guidelines-under-development/#91).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12906-019-2624-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Reporting quality of the 2014 Ebola outbreak in Africa: A systematic analysis

The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic analysis of the reporting quality of the Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) outbreak in West Africa from 2014-2018 using the Modified STROBE statement. We included studies on the 2014 EVD outbreak alone, limited to those on human patients in Africa. We searched the following databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science) for outbreak reports published between 2014-2018. We assessed factors potentially associated with the quality of reporting. A total of 69 of 131 (53%) articles within the full-text review fulfilled our eligibility criteria and underwent the Modified STROBE assessment for analyzing the quality of reporting. The Modified STROBE scores of the included studies ranged from 11-26 points and the mean was found to be 19.54 out of 30 with a standard deviation (SD) of ± 4.30. The top three reported Modified STROBE components were descriptive characteristics of study participants, scientific background and evidence rational, and clinical significance of observations. More than 75% of the studies met a majority of the criteria in the Modified STROBE assessment tool. Information that was commonly missing included addressing potential source of bias, sensitivity analysis, further results/analysis such as risk estimates and odds ratios, presence of a flowchart, and addressing missing data. In multivariable analysis, peer-reviewed publication was the only predictor that remained significantly associated with a higher Modified STROBE score. In conclusion, the large range of Modified STROBE scores observed indicates variability in the quality of outbreak reports for EVD. The review identified strong reporting in some areas, whereas other areas are in need of improvement, in particular providing an important description of the outbreak setting and identifying any external elements (potential biases and confounding factors) that could hinder the credibility of the findings.

Assessment of the quality of reporting in studies of acupuncture for patients with cancer using the STRICTA guidelines

Introduction:

There has been a burgeoning of research evaluating acupuncture for various symptoms of cancer and the side-effects associated with its treatment. A systematic review was conducted to examine the quality of reporting in published studies of acupuncture in cancer according to the STRICTA (STandards for Reporting Interventions in Clinical Trials of Acupuncture) guidelines.

Methods:

Systematic review of published research of acupuncture for symptoms of cancer and the side-effects associated with its treatment. Databases searched were: Medline, CINAHL, Cochrane (all databases), Scopus, and PubMed from their inception to December 2014. Clinical trials, pilot/feasibility studies, observational studies, and case studies were included. Only full journal papers published in English were included. The quality of reporting was evaluated using STRICTA guidelines. Each included paper was assessed by two independent reviewers, with disagreements adjudicated by a third reviewer.

Results:

88 papers were identified which met the inclusion criteria. The median number of STRICTA items reported in trials with a control or comparator arm (n=47) was 14 out of 17 (range 8 to 17, IQR 4). For studies without a control or comparator arm the median was 11 out of a possible 15 (range 5 to 15, IQR 3). Key weaknesses in reporting included details of other components of treatments, and details of the acupuncturist administering treatments.

Conclusions:

Despite the widespread use of the STRICTA guidelines in acupuncture research, adherence remains poor for a few specific items. Further research is required to explore the reasons why authors fail to report those items, and to develop strategies to improve the adherence to the guidelines.

A randomised controlled trial of an Intervention to Improve Compliance with the ARRIVE guidelines (IICARus)

BACKGROUND

The ARRIVE (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments) guidelines are widely endorsed but compliance is limited. We sought to determine whether journal-requested completion of an ARRIVE checklist improves full compliance with the guidelines.

METHODS

In a randomised controlled trial, manuscripts reporting in vivo animal research submitted to PLOS ONE (March-June 2015) were randomly allocated to either requested completion of an ARRIVE checklist or current standard practice. Authors, academic editors, and peer reviewers were blinded to group allocation. Trained reviewers performed outcome adjudication in duplicate by assessing manuscripts against an operationalised version of the ARRIVE guidelines that consists 108 items. Our primary outcome was the between-group differences in the proportion of manuscripts meeting all ARRIVE guideline checklist subitems.

RESULTS

We randomised 1689 manuscripts (control: n = 844, intervention: n = 845), of which 1269 were sent for peer review and 762 (control: n = 340; intervention: n = 332) accepted for publication. No manuscript in either group achieved full compliance with the ARRIVE checklist. Details of animal husbandry (ARRIVE subitem 9b) was the only subitem to show improvements in reporting, with the proportion of compliant manuscripts rising from 52.1 to 74.1% (X 2 = 34.0, df = 1, p = 2.1 × 10-7) in the control and intervention groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that altering the editorial process to include requests for a completed ARRIVE checklist is not enough to improve compliance with the ARRIVE guidelines. Other approaches, such as more stringent editorial policies or a targeted approach on key quality items, may promote improvements in reporting.

Do Addiction Science Journals Endorse Unbiased Reporting of Research? A Systematic Evaluation of Instructions for Authors

Introduction: Well-structured instructions for authors in journals help researchers in reporting unbiased results, which subsequently facilitates the review process. There have been reports of systematic evaluations of instructions for authors from journals in various medical specialties. However, precise information on the nature and extent of these instructions for authors in addiction science is lacking. Hence, this study systematically evaluated the instructions for authors for journals in addiction science. Methods: A total of 1139 journal titles were retrieved across multiple databases. Finally, 88 exclusive titles fulfilling the eligibility criteria were considered in this study. The four domains evaluated were journal characteristics, reporting, statistical reporting, and ethical requirements. Results: More than half of the journals were published by academic institutions or professional societies. Less than one-fourth of the journals endorsed adherence to various reporting guidelines and endorsed the Consolidated Statements on Randomized Controlled Trials guidelines to the maximum level (14.8%). Approximately, half (48.9%) of the journals had a separate section on "statistical analysis." The various parameters of statistical reporting were suboptimally endorsed. Conclusion/Importance: The instructions for authors in addiction science journals provide insufficient information in various domains. There is an urgent need to improve the author instructions segment of addiction science journals so that the process of research dissemination can occur more effectively. A higher rate of endorsement of various reporting guidelines and statistical reporting may help to minimize reporting bias as well as prevent unnecessary delays in the publication of important research findings.

Quality of Reporting of Randomised Controlled Trials of Acupuncture for Neurological Diseases Conducted in China

Objectives

To investigate the quality of reporting for randomised controlled trials of acupuncture for neurological disorders conducted in China before and after the implementation of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) and Standards for Reporting Interventions in Controlled Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA) guidelines.

Methods

The quality of reporting for included papers was assessed against a subset of criteria adapted from CONSORT and STRICTA. CONSORT and STRICTA were developed in 1996 and 2001, respectively. Thus, for the date of publication we selected 2-year periods, at 5-yearly intervals: 1994–1995; 1999–2000; 2004–2005 and 2009–2010. These selections cover the periods before the publication dates of both guidelines (1996, 2001) and at least 3 years afterwards, and provide reasonably up-to-date data. We calculated the total score for each guideline and compared reported differences during different date ranges.

Results

For CONSORT items (maximum score 8), there was evidence of a slight improvement in reporting between 1994–1995 and 1999–2000 combined (2.5±0.6) and 2004–2005 and 2009–2010 combined (3.0±0.9) (difference 0.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 0.8). For STRICTA items (maximum score 17), there was evidence of a slight improvement in reporting between 1994–1995 and 1999–2000 combined (8.9±1.8) and 2004–2005 and 2009–2010 combined (10.3±1.6) (difference 1.4, 95% CI 0.9 to 1.9).

Conclusions

The quality of reporting for studies of acupuncture for neurological disorders has generally improved since the implementation of STRICTA and CONSORT guidelines.

Reporting Characteristics and Risk of Bias in Randomised Controlled Trials of Acupuncture Analgesia Published in Pubmed-Listed Journals

Background

Acupuncture analgesia has been evaluated by a number of randomised controlled trials (RCTs); however, a systematic summary of reporting quality of RCTs in this specific field is lacking.

Objective

To examine the reporting characteristics and risk of bias of RCTs of acupuncture analgesia indexed in the PubMed database.

Methods

A PubMed search of RCTs of acupuncture analgesia was conducted through November 2015. The Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess the risk of bias of each trial.

Results

206 articles were identified across 59 journals (impact factor 0.4–20), of which 56% of articles and 86% of journals were Science Citation Index (SCI)-indexed. Nearly half of the articles were published in China. The next most represented countries of origin were the UK (22%) and USA (21%). Of the included trials, postoperative pain was the most prevalent phenotype, and manual acupuncture was the most frequently applied type of stimulation (46%). A total of 12% of articles reported on analgesic mechanisms. The most frequently used acupuncture points were LI4, ST36, PC6, SP6 and Shenmen. The overwhelming majority of trials were considered to be at high risk of bias (84%). Furthermore, 79% of trials enrolled <50 participants per treatment arm.

Conclusions

RCTs of acupuncture analgesia indexed in PubMed journals generally exhibited poor reporting of methodological and treatment details. Future studies should provide more information regarding clinical trial registration, blinding of participants (including sham procedures where applicable) and outcome assessors, as well as the training and qualification of acupuncturists.

The Reporting Items for Patent Landscapes statement

The reporting quality of patent landscapes is inadequate. The Reporting Items for Patent Landscapes (RIPL) checklist can improve reporting quality.

Does the medical literature remain inadequately described despite having reporting guidelines for 21 years? - A systematic review of reviews: an update

PURPOSE

Reporting guidelines (eg, Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials [CONSORT] statement) are intended to improve reporting standards and enhance the transparency and reproducibility of research findings. Despite accessibility of such guidelines, researchers are not required to adhere to them. Our goal was to determine the current status of reporting quality in the medical literature and examine whether adherence of reporting guidelines has improved since the inception of reporting guidelines.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eight reporting guidelines, such as CONSORT, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE), Quality of Reporting of Meta-analysis (QUOROM), STAndards for Reporting of Diagnostic accuracy (STARD), Animal Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE), Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS), and Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) were examined. Our inclusion criteria included reviews published between January 1996 to September 2016 which investigated the adherence to reporting guidelines in the literature that addressed clinical trials, systematic reviews, observational studies, meta-analysis, diagnostic accuracy, economic evaluations, and preclinical animal studies that were in English. All reviews were found on Web of Science, Excerpta Medical Database (EMBASE), MEDLINE, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL).

RESULTS

Among the general searching of 26,819 studies by using the designed searching method, 124 studies were included post screening. We found that 87.9% of the included studies reported suboptimal adherence to reporting guidelines. Factors associated with poor adherence included non-pharmacological interventions, year of publication, and trials concluding with significant results. Improved adherence was associated with better study designs such as allocation concealment, random sequence, large sample sizes, adequately powered studies, multiple authorships, and being published in journals endorsing guidelines.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that the level of adherence to reporting guidelines remains suboptimal. Endorsement of reporting guidelines by journals is important and recommended.

The impact of STRICTA and CONSORT on reporting of randomised control trials of acupuncture: a systematic methodological evaluation

BACKGROUND

Clear and unambiguous reporting is essential for researchers and clinicians to be able to assess the quality of research. To enhance the quality of reporting, consensus-based reporting guidelines are commonly used.

OBJECTIVES

To update and extend previous research by evaluating the more recent impact of STRICTA (STandards for Reporting Interventions in Controlled Trials of Acupuncture) and CONSORT (CONsolidated Standards Of Reporting Trials) guidelines on the quality of reporting of acupuncture trials.

METHODS

By random sampling, approximately 45 trials from each of five 2-year time periods between 1994 and 2015 were included in the study. Using scoring sheets based on the STRICTA and CONSORT checklist items (range 0 to 7 and 0 to 5, respectively), the distribution of items reported over time was investigated, with changes shown using scatterplots. The primary analysis used a before-and-after t-test to compare time periods. A meta-analysis investigated whether or not trials published in journals that endorsed STRICTA were associated with better reporting.

RESULTS

The study included 207 trials. Improved reporting of items over time was observed, as represented by changes in the scatterplot slope and intercept. The mean STRICTA score increased from 4.27 in the 1994-1995 period to 5.53 in 2014-2015, an 18% improvement. The mean CONSORT score rose from 1.01 in the 1994-1995 period to 3.32 in 2014-2015, an increment of 46%. There was proportionately lower reporting for items related to practitioner background (STRICTA) and for randomisation implementation and allocation concealment (CONSORT). Trials published in journals that endorsed STRICTA had statistically significantly superior reporting of both STRICTA and CONSORT items overall.

CONCLUSION

This study has provided evidence of an improvement in reporting of STRICTA and CONSORT items over the time period from 1994 to 2015. Journals that endorse STRICTA have a better record in terms of reporting quality. Some evidence suggests that the publication of STRICTA has had a positive impact on reporting quality.

Low-level laser treatment applied at auriculotherapy points to reduce postoperative pain in third molar surgery: A randomized, controlled, single-blinded study

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the effectiveness of LLL (Low level laser therapy) in auriculotherapy points for pain reduction following lower third molar extractions.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized, controlled, single-blinded study.

METHODS

Eighty-four bilateral, symmetrical third molar surgeries were performed in 42 healthy patients using a split-mouth design. In the immediate postoperative period, each side was randomly treated in a single-blind method with an LLL at the auriculotherapy points or simulation of its use (contralateral side) over a 21-day interval. This protocol was repeated 24 and 48 hours after surgery. All patients used the same analgesic (paracetamol) but only in case of pain. The primary variable was postoperative pain according to the visual analogue scale, and the secondary variables were mouth opening, edema, local temperature, dysphagia, and the presence of infection (systemic temperature, lymphadenopathy). These variables were evaluated at baseline and at 24 hours, 48 hours and seven days after surgery. Adverse effects were recorded and reported.

RESULTS

There was no difference between the groups in relation to any of the evaluated parameters (p>0.05).

CONCLUSION

For this experimental model, application of a low-intensity laser at auriculotherapy points did not prevent postoperative pain following lower third molar surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov; the registration number is NCT02657174 and the Unique Protocol ID number is 1.100.869. (https://register.clinicaltrials.gov/prs/app/template/EditRecord.vm?epmode=View&listmode=Edit&uid=U0002BEY&ts=11&sid=S0006026&cx=6g4wff).

Quality improvement in randomized controlled trial abstracts in prosthodontics since the publication of CONSORT guideline for abstracts: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to compare the reporting quality of randomized controlled trial (RCT) abstracts in prosthodontics before and after the publication of Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guideline for abstracts and identify the characteristics associated with better reporting quality.

SOURCES

PubMed was searched for RCT abstracts published from 2001 to 2007 (pre-CONSORT period) and from 2010 to 2016 (post-CONSORT period) in six leading prosthodontic journals.

STUDY SELECTION

After applying the inclusion/exclusion criteria, 131 RCT abstracts were selected. The t test was performed to compare the overall quality between the two periods. Univariable and multivariable linear regressions were used to identify any factors relating to the reporting quality. The level of significance was set at P < 0.05.

DATA

The investigators extracted data and scored the abstracts independently based on CONSORT. The mean overall CONSORT score was 5.20 and 6.11 in the pre- and post-CONSORT samples, respectively. Significant changes were observed in reporting for only three items: title, conclusions, and trial registration. Most abstracts adequately reported interventions, objectives, and conclusions (>90%), but failed to report recruitment and outcome in the results section (<3%). Funding was not reported in both periods. The reporting quality was related to a higher impact factor, structured format, and published after CONSORT.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of RCT abstracts in prosthodontics improved over time, but adherence to the CONSORT guideline for abstracts was still suboptimal.

The quality of reporting in randomized controlled trials of acupuncture for knee osteoarthritis: A cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVE

To assess the reporting quality of acupuncture trials for knee osteoarthritis (KOA), and explore the factors associated with the reporting.

METHOD

Three English and four Chinese databases were searched from inception to December 2016 for randomized control trials testing effects of acupuncture for knee osteoarthritis. We used the standard CONSORT (2010 version), CONSORT Extension for Non-Pharmacological Treatments, and STRICTA for measuring the quality of reporting. Using pre-specified study characteristics, we undertook regression analyses to examine factors associated with the reporting quality.

RESULTS

A total of 318 RCT reports were included. For the standard CONSORT, ten items were substantially under-reported (reported in less than 5% of RCTs), including specification of important changes to methods after trial commencement (0.6%), description of any changes to trial outcomes (0.0%), implementation of interim analyses and stopping guidelines (0.6%), statement about why the trial ended or was stopped (1.6%), statement about the registration status (4.4%), accessibility of full trial protocol (4.7%), implementation of randomization (4.7%), description of the similarity of interventions (3.5%), conduct of ancillary analyses (3.8%) and presentation of methods for additional analyses (4.4%). Four of the STRICTA items were under-reported (reported in less than 10% of RCTs), including description of acupuncture style (8.5%), presentation of extent to which treatment varied (1.3%), statement of practitioner background (7.2%) and rationale for the control (9.1%). For CONSORT Extension, the reporting was poor across all items (reported in less than 10% of trials). Trials including authors with expertise in epidemiology or statistics, published in English, or enrolling patients from multiple centers were more likely to have better reporting.

CONCLUSIONS

The reporting in RCTs of acupuncture for KOA was generally poor. To improve the reporting quality, journals should encourage strict adherence to the reporting guidelines.

Enhancing primary reports of randomized controlled trials: Three most common challenges and suggested solutions

Evidence from a well-designed randomized controlled trial (RCT) is generally considered to be the gold standard that can inform clinical practice and guide decision-making. However, several deficiencies in the reporting of RCTs have frequently been identified, including incomplete, selective, and biased or inconsistent reporting. Such suboptimal reporting may lead to irreproducible results, substantial waste of resources, impaired study validity, erosion of public trust in science, and a high risk of research misconduct. In this article, we present an overview of the reporting of RCTs in the biomedical literature with a focus on the three most common reporting problems: (i) lack of adherence to reporting guidelines, (ii) inconsistencies between trial protocols or registrations and full reports, and (iii) inconsistencies between abstracts and their corresponding full reports. Unsatisfactory levels of adherence to guidelines and frequent inconsistencies between protocols or registrations and full reports, and between abstracts and full reports, were consistently found in various biomedical research fields. A variety of factors were found to be associated with these reporting challenges. Improved reporting can build public trust and credibility of science, save resources, and enhance the ethical integrity of research. Therefore, joint efforts from the various sectors of the biomedical community (researchers, journal editors and reviewers, educators, healthcare providers, and other research consumers) are needed to reduce and reverse the current suboptimal state of RCT reporting in the literature.

The application of PRECIS-2 ratings in randomized controlled trials of Chinese herbal medicine

This study tests the feasibility of applying the pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary (version "PRECIS-2") tool to randomized controlled trials of Chinese herbal medicine. A search was conducted to identify potentially eligible randomized controlled trials. Using the PRECIS-2 tool, assessment of trials was performed independently by 2 evaluators using a scale of 1-5 for each criterion (1 = maximal efficacy, 5 = maximal effectiveness). A total of 7,166 reports were retrieved from databases and 159 were included in the full text. Though PRECIS-2 describes quantitative scoring in detail, evaluators were uncertain about several specific operationalizations and found high evaluator variation in the first independent ratings. After discussion and reaching consensus, inter-evaluator reliability improved. For PRECIS-2 ratings over time, there was no evidence that the design and performance of RCTs of CHM paid more attention to "efficacy" criteria after the implementation of PRECIS (all P > 0.05). More research is needed to establish the easiest and most useful tool to distinguish between effectiveness and efficacy results.

Reliability of the NICMAN Scale: An Instrument to Assess the Quality of Acupuncture Administered in Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to examine the reliability of a scale to assess the methodological quality of acupuncture administered in clinical research.

METHODS

We invited 36 acupuncture researchers and postgraduate students to participate in the study. Firstly, participants rated two articles using the scale. Following this initial stage, modifications were made to scale items and the exercise was repeated. Interrater reliability was assessed for individual items using the Fleiss kappa statistic, whilst the overall scale used the intraclass correlation coefficient statistic. A threshold agreement of ≥0.61 was acceptable.

RESULTS

We received 26 responses and a 72% response rate. The first phase of testing found moderate reliability with intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.46 and 0.55 for the articles. The interrater reliability of the scales varied between and within the researchers (0.35, 0.60) and was more consistent with the postgraduate students (0.54, 0.54). Five items on the scale scored below the threshold and were revised for further testing. In this phase the intraclass correlation coefficient demonstrated variability between articles but improved to achieve reliability above the agreed threshold.

CONCLUSION

This study provides evidence of the reliability of the NICMAN scale although improvements to a small number of items remain.

The quality of reports of medical and public health research from Palestinian institutions: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Over the past decade, there has been an increase in reports of health research from Palestine, but no assessment of their quality. We have assessed the quality of reports of Palestinian health research and factors associated with it.

DESIGN

This is a systematic review.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

We searched Medline and Scopus for reports of original research relevant to human health or healthcare authored by researchers affiliated with Palestinian institutions and published between January 2000 and August 2015 inclusive.

OUTCOMES

We used international guidelines to assess report quality, classifying as adequate those with ≥50% of items completely addressed.

RESULTS

Of 2383 reports identified, 497 met our inclusion criteria. Just over half (264; 55%) of these were published after 2010. 354 (71%) of first authors were affiliated with Palestinian institutions; 261 (53%) reports had coauthors from outside Palestine. The majority of the reports in our study were inadequately reported (342; 69%), and none had adequately reported all items. Of 439 observational studies, 11 (2.5%) reports provided adequate descriptions of eligibility criteria and selection procedures; 35 (8%) reported efforts to address potential sources of bias; 50 (11.4%) reported the basis for the study sample size; and funding sources were mentioned in 74 reports (17%). Higher reporting quality was associated with international affiliation of the first author (prevalence ratio (PR) 1.6 (95% CI 1.2 to 2.1)), international collaboration (PR 2.9 (95% CI 1.7 to 5.0)), international funding (PR 1.9 (95% CI1.5 to 2.5)), publication after 2005 (PR 3.9 (95% CI 1.8 to 8.5)) and four or more coauthors (PR 1.5 (95% CI 1.1 to 2.1)).

CONCLUSION

Although the quality of reports of Palestinian research has improved in recent years, it remains well below an acceptable standard. International reporting guidelines should be used to guide research design and improve the quality of reports of research.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

The systematic review protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) registery (registration number: CRD42015027553).

The Current Status of Quality of Reporting in Acupuncture Treatment Case Reports: An Analysis of the Core Journal in Korea

OBJECTIVES

The present study aimed to evaluate the overall quality of case reports concerning acupuncture treatment in Korea.

METHODS

We selected a representative Korean journal and retrieved eligible case reports on acupuncture treatment published from 2009 to 2015. We assessed the quality of reporting based on CAse REport (CARE) and STandards for Reporting Interventions in Clinical Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA) guideline checklists.

RESULTS

A total of 93 eligible case reports of acupuncture treatment were identified among the 107 articles screened. Overall quality of reporting in the case reports was generally acceptable (75.4% on CARE, 67.7% on STRICTA), but several crucial items remained substantially underreported.

CONCLUSIONS

Endorsement of the CARE and STRICTA guidelines is needed to improve the completeness of reporting. Our findings will be helpful in developing a more appropriate reporting guideline for case reports in acupuncture treatment.

State of reporting of primary biomedical research: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Incomplete or inconsistent reporting remains a major concern in the biomedical literature. Incomplete or inconsistent reporting may yield the published findings unreliable, irreproducible or sometimes misleading. In this study based on evidence from systematic reviews and surveys that have evaluated the reporting issues in primary biomedical studies, we aim to conduct a scoping review with focuses on (1) the state-of-the-art extent of adherence to the emerging reporting guidelines in primary biomedical research, (2) the inconsistency between protocols or registrations and full reports and (3) the disagreement between abstracts and full-text articles.

METHODS AND ANALYSES

We will use a comprehensive search strategy to retrieve all available and eligible systematic reviews and surveys in the literature. We will search the following electronic databases: Web of Science, Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), MEDLINE and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL). Our outcomes are levels of adherence to reporting guidelines, levels of consistency between protocols or registrations and full reports and the agreement between abstracts and full reports, all of which will be expressed as percentages, quality scores or categorised rating (such as high, medium and low). No pooled analyses will be performed quantitatively given the heterogeneity of the included systematic reviews and surveys. Likewise, factors associated with improved completeness and consistency of reporting will be summarised qualitatively. The quality of the included systematic reviews will be evaluated using AMSTAR (a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

All findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and relevant conferences. These results may advance our understanding of the extent of incomplete and inconsistent reporting, factors related to improved completeness and consistency of reporting and potential recommendations for various stakeholders in the biomedical community.

Reporting of critical care trial abstracts: a comparison before and after the announcement of CONSORT guideline for abstracts

Background

An extension of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement provides a checklist of items to improve the reporting quality of abstracts of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, authors of abstracts in some fields have poorly adhered to this guideline. We did an extensive literature survey to examine the quality of reporting trial abstracts in major critical care journals before and after announcement of the CONSORT guideline for abstracts.

Methods

We reviewed abstracts of RCTs published in four major critical care journals with publication dates ranging from 2006 to 2007 (pre-CONSORT) and from 2011 to 2012 (post-CONSORT): Intensive Care Medicine (ICM), Critical Care (CC), American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine (AJRCCM), and Critical Care Medicine (CCM). For each item in the CONSORT guideline for abstracts, we considered that an abstract was well-reported when it reported a relevant item and adhered to the guideline. Our primary outcomes were to describe the proportion of abstracts that adhered to the guideline for each item in each period and the changes between the two periods. Pearson’s chi-square analysis was performed to compare adherence to the guideline between the two periods.

Results

Our inclusion criteria yielded 185 and 166 abstracts from pre- and post-CONSORT periods, respectively. Less than 50% of abstracts adequately reported trial design (16.3%), participants (44.0%), outcomes in methods (49.4%), randomization (1.8%), blinding (4.2%), numbers randomized (37.4%) and analyzed (8.4%), recruitment (4.2%), outcomes in results (16.9%), harms (27.7%), trial registration (42.2%), and funding (13.9%) in the recent period. There was significant improvement in reporting title, primary outcomes in both methods and results, interventions, harms, trial registration, and funding between the two periods (p < 0.05). Improvements were seen in reporting of participants in the Methods sections in CCM, as well as in outcomes in results and trial registration in AJRCCM and CCM, between the two periods. A significant decline was noted in reporting of interventions in Methods sections in AJRCCM and ICM, as well as the numbers randomized in Results sections in CC, over time.

Conclusions

Reporting of some items in abstracts for critical care trials improved over time, but the adherence to the CONSORT guideline for abstracts was still suboptimal.

Do emergency medicine journals promote trial registration and adherence to reporting guidelines? A survey of "Instructions for Authors"

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate the current state of two publication practices, reporting guidelines requirements and clinical trial registration requirements, by analyzing the “Instructions for Authors” of emergency medicine journals.

Methods

We performed a web-based data abstraction from the “Instructions for Authors” of the 27 Emergency Medicine journals catalogued in the Expanded Science Citation Index of the 2014 Journal Citation Reports and Google Scholar Metrics h5-index to identify whether each journal required, recommended, or made no mention of the following reporting guidelines: EQUATOR Network, ICMJE, ARRIVE, CARE, CONSORT, STARD, TRIPOD, CHEERS, MOOSE, STROBE, COREQ, SRQR, SQUIRE, PRISMA-P, SPIRIT, PRISMA, and QUOROM. We also extracted whether journals required or recommended trial registration. Authors were blinded to one another’s ratings until completion of the data validation. Cross-tabulations and descriptive statistics were calculated using IBM SPSS 22.

Results

Of the 27 emergency medicine journals, 11 (11/27, 40.7%) did not mention a single guideline within their “Instructions for Authors,” while the remaining 16 (16/27, 59.3%) mentioned one or more guidelines. The QUOROM statement and SRQR were not mentioned by any journals whereas the ICMJE guidelines (18/27, 66.7%) and CONSORT statement (15/27, 55.6%) were mentioned most often. Of the 27 emergency medicine journals, 15 (15/27, 55.6%) did not mention trial or review registration, while the remaining 12 (12/27, 44.4%) at least mentioned one of the two. Trial registration through ClinicalTrials.gov was mentioned by seven (7/27, 25.9%) journals while the WHO registry was mentioned by four (4/27, 14.8%). Twelve (12/27, 44.4%) journals mentioned trial registration through any registry platform.

Discussion

The aim of this study was to evaluate the current state of two publication practices, reporting guidelines requirements and clinical trial registration requirements, by analyzing the “Instructions for Authors” of emergency medicine journals. In this study, there was not a single reporting guideline mentioned in more than half of the journals. This undermines efforts of other journals to improve the completeness and transparency of research reporting.

Conclusions

Reporting guidelines are infrequently required or recommended by emergency medicine journals. Furthermore, few require clinical trial registration. These two mechanisms may limit bias and should be considered for adoption by journal editors in emergency medicine.

Trial registration

UMIN000022486

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13049-016-0331-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The RECORD reporting guidelines: meeting the methodological and ethical demands of transparency in research using routinely-collected health data

Routinely-collected health data (RCD) are now used for a wide range of studies, including observational studies, comparative effectiveness research, diagnostics, studies of adverse effects, and predictive analytics. At the same time, limitations inherent in using data collected without specific a priori research questions are increasingly recognized. There is also a growing awareness of the suboptimal quality of reports presenting research based on RCD. This has created a perfect storm of increased interest and use of RCD for research, together with inadequate reporting of the strengths and weaknesses of these data resources. The REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected Data (RECORD) statement was developed to address these limitations and to help researchers using RCD to meet their ethical obligations of complete and accurate reporting, as well as improve the utility of research conducted using RCD. The RECORD statement has been endorsed by more than 15 journals, including Clinical Epidemiology. This journal now recommends that authors submit the RECORD checklist together with any manuscript reporting on research using RCD.