[Evaluation of methodological quality in published RCTs on cataract surgery : Pilot study on the degree of adherence to CONSORT statement requirements and their qualitative validity].

backgroundThe CONSORT statement can be considered as a guideline to ensure transparency in the reporting of randomized clinical trials (RCT), in addition to specific author instructions and requirements of journals. It provides a total of 25 criteria and 12 additional subcriteria on methodological and regulatorical determinants of clinical trials. The availability of the CONSORT recommendations, however, does not necessarily imply adherence to their obligations and correct realisation of the latter from a methodological perspective, so that even in ophthalmology a lack of transparency in trial reporting cannot be excluded.

objectiveThe question was whether a consistent consideration of the CONSORT checklist criteria by authors actually implied transparent reporting of underlying study results. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis pilot study was based on a random sample of six published RCTs on cataract surgery extracted from an existing trial publication register. Compliance with each of the 25 CONSORT criteria and its 12 subcriteria and the content accuracy of the latter were independently assessed by two parallel raters for the six trial publications.

resultsThe median compliance with the 37 CONSORT criteria and subcriteria was 62% [min-max 48-81%]; the median fraction of their correct implementation was 47% [min-max 34-69%].

conclusionsPromotion of transparent reporting by means of the CONSORT statement appears to be problematic in implementation. There is a discrepancy between information as required by CONSORT and the content accuracy of its actual presentation. Thus, in particular, reviewers of clinical trial publications should not only check for the presence of data to be provided according to CONSORT, but also verify the meaningfulness in the respective context, at least on a random basis.