pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

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

  • ️Tue Jan 01 2008

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

Stephanie L Prady et al. PLoS One. 2008.

Abstract

Background: We investigated whether there had been an improvement in quality of reporting for randomised controlled trials of acupuncture since the publication of the STRICTA and CONSORT statements. We conducted a before-and-after study, comparing ratings for quality of reporting following the publication of both STRICTA and CONSORT recommendations.

Methodology and principal findings: Ninety peer reviewed journal articles reporting the results of acupuncture trials were selected at random from a wider sample frame of 266 papers. Papers published in three distinct time periods (1994-1995, 1999-2000 and 2004-2005) were compared. Assessment criteria were developed directly from CONSORT and STRICTA checklists. Papers were independently assessed for quality of reporting by two assessors, one of whom was blind to information which could have introduced systematic bias (e.g. date of publication). We detected a statistically significant increase in the reporting of CONSORT items for papers published in each time period measured. We did not, however, find a difference between the number of STRICTA items reported in journal articles published before and 3 to 4 years following the introduction of STRICTA recommendations.

Conclusions and significance: The results of this study suggest that general standards of reporting for acupuncture trials have significantly improved since the introduction of the CONSORT statement in 1996, but that quality in reporting details specific to acupuncture interventions has yet to change following the more recent introduction of STRICTA recommendations. Wider targeting and revision of the guidelines is recommended.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: Hugh MacPherson had a leading role in the development of STRICTA recommendations. No other competing interests are declared

Figures

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, Horton R, Moher D, et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. the CONSORT statement. JAMA. 1996;276(8):637–639. - PubMed
    1. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman D CONSORT Group (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) The CONSORT statement: Revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. JAMA. 2001;285(15):1987–1991. - PubMed
    1. MacPherson H, White A, Cummings M, Jobst K, Rose K, et al. Standards for reporting interventions in controlled trials of acupuncture: The STRICTA recommendations. Complement Ther Med. 2001;9(4):246–249. - PubMed
    1. MacPherson H, White A, Cummings M, Jobst K, Rose K, et al. Standards for reporting interventions in controlled trials of acupuncture: The STRICTA recommendations.STandards for reporting interventions in controlled trails of acupuncture. Acupunct Med. 2002;20(1):22–25. - PubMed
    1. MacPherson H, White A, Cummings M, Jobst K, Rose K, et al. Standards for reporting interventions in controlled trials of acupuncture: The STRICTA recommendations. J Altern Complement Med. 2002;8(1):85–89. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms