ArticleTrials2014
A retrospective survey of quality of reporting on randomized controlled trials of metformin for polycystic ovary syndrome.
Article in Trials, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Review of Adherence and Predictors of Adherence to the CONSORT Statement in the Reporting of Tuberculosis Vaccine Trials.Vaccines · 2020Article
- Trends and predictors of biomedical research quality, 1990-2015: a meta-research study.BMJ open · 2019Review
- Assessing the quality of reports about randomized controlled trials of scalp acupuncture combined with another treatment for stroke.BMC complementary and alternative medicine · 2017Article
- Article
- Quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials in chiropractic using the CONSORT checklist.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2016Article
- Quality of randomized controlled trials reporting in the treatment of melasma conducted in China.Trials · 2015Article
- Sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors for glycemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus: Quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials.Perspectives in clinical researchArticle
- The critical appraisal of randomized controlled trials published in an Indian journal to assess the quality of reporting: A retrospective, cross-sectional study.Perspectives in clinical researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFrom previous reviews, there still have been controversies over the effect of metformin (MET) on reproductive function in PCOS patients. The reasons for the inconsistent findings especially lie in the transparency and accuracy of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reports. However, we could find no data about the quality of RCTs reporting in MET for PCOS. Thus, a retrospective survey related to the quality of reporting in MET for PCOS was conducted.
methodsA retrospective survey was conducted by two investigators. Two investigators assessed the quality of overall reporting and key methodological factors reporting using items from the CONSORT 2010 statement.
resultsA total of 39 RCTs were included in full text. The median overall quality score was 9, with a minimum of 2 and a maximum of 13. Good or general reporting existed in 11 items with positive rate of more than or equal to 50%. The median score of key methodological items was 4 with a minimum of 0 and a maximum of 5. Randomization, allocation concealment, blinding, baseline characteristics and intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis were reported in 26 (67%), 19 (49%), 20 (51%), 38 (97%) and 17 (44%) of the 39 RCTs, respectively. After adjustment, the mean overall score increased by about 1.71 for manuscripts with funding source (95% CI, 0.18 to 3.24), while it increased by about 3.51 for manuscripts published in one year increment (95% CI, 1.82 to 5.19). There was a relatively close, significant correlation (r = 0.589, P < 0.001) between the score of overall reporting quality and year of publication.
conclusionAlthough the overall reporting quality of RCTs in MET for PCOS has improved over time, reporting of key methodological items remains poor. Reporting of RCTs on MET for PCOS should keep up with the standards of the CONSORT statement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.