Other members listed at end of paper
Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement†
Article first published online: 6 DEC 2002
© 2000 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd
British Journal of Surgery
Volume 87, Issue 11, pages 1448–1454, 1 November 2000
How to Cite
Moher, D., Cook, D. J., Eastwood, S., Olkin, I., Rennie, D., Stroup, D. F. and for the QUOROM Group (2000), Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Br J Surg, 87: 1448–1454. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2168.2000.01610.x
Reprinted with permission from the Lancet 1999; 354: 1896–900
- Issue published online: 6 DEC 2002
- Article first published online: 6 DEC 2002
The Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses (QUOROM) conference was convened to address standards for improving the quality of reporting of meta-analyses of clinical randomised controlled trials (RCTs).
The QUOROM group consisted of 30 clinical epidemiologists, clinicians, statisticians, editors, and researchers. In conference, the group was asked to identify items they thought should be included in a checklist of standards. Whenever possible, checklist items were guided by research evidence suggesting that failure to adhere to the item proposed could lead to biased results. A modified Delphi technique was used in assessing candidate items.
The conference resulted in the QUOROM statement, a checklist, and a flow diagram. The checklist describes our preferred way to present the abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of a report of a meta-analysis. It is organised into 21 headings and subheadings regarding searches, selection, validity assessment, data abstraction, study characteristics, and quantitative data synthesis, and in the results with ‘trial flow’, study characteristics, and quantitative data synthesis; research documentation was identified for eight of the 18 items. The flow diagram provides information about both the numbers of RCTs identified, included, and excluded and the reasons for exclusion of trials.
We hope this report will generate further thought about ways to improve the quality of reports of meta-analyses of RCTs and that interested readers, reviewers, researchers, and editors will use the QUOROM statement and generate ideas for its improvement. © 2000 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd