Dr. Bai Yu and Dr. Gao Jun contributed equally to this work.
Methodological reporting of randomized clinical trials in major gastroenterology and hepatology journals in 2006†
Article first published online: 17 MAR 2009
Copyright © 2009 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases
Volume 49, Issue 6, pages 2108–2112, June 2009
How to Cite
Bai, Y., Gao, J., Zou, D.-W. and Li, Z.-S. (2009), Methodological reporting of randomized clinical trials in major gastroenterology and hepatology journals in 2006. Hepatology, 49: 2108–2112. doi: 10.1002/hep.22861
Potential conflict of interest: Nothing to report.
- Issue published online: 28 MAY 2009
- Article first published online: 17 MAR 2009
- Manuscript Accepted: 19 JAN 2009
- Manuscript Received: 25 SEP 2008
To determine the current quality of reporting of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in the field of gastroenterology and hepatology, we evaluated the methodological reporting of RCTs in six major gastroenterology and hepatology journals. The methodological quality, including generation of the allocation sequence, allocation concealment, double-blinding, and sample size calculation; number of patients; disease area; and funding source was also retrieved from each trial, and the relevant trials were identified by searching MEDLINE in 2006 using a highly sensitive search strategy. The status of reporting the methodological quality of RCTs was descriptively reported. One hundred five trials were included in the final analysis; of these, 81% (85/105) reported adequate generation of the allocation sequence, 61% (64/105) reported adequate allocation concealment, 51% (54/105) were double-blind, and 75% (79/105) reported adequate sample size calculation. The reported methodological quality greatly improved when compared with historical cohorts. Conclusion: This study shows that there was substantial improvement in the reported methodological quality in the major gastroenterology and hepatology journals, but this quality can be further improved. (HEPATOLOGY 2009.)