ArticleTrials2018
Reporting quality of randomized controlled trial abstracts in the seven highest-ranking anesthesiology journals.
Article in Trials, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Prepublication abstract-only reports compared with full-text manuscripts for randomised controlled trials in inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2024Pooled it
- A multiyear systematic survey of the quality of reporting for randomised trials in dentistry, neurology and geriatrics published in journals of Spain and Latin America.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Pooled it
- A systematic review of the quality of conduct and reporting of survival analyses of tuberculosis outcomes in Africa.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Pooled it
- Adherence to CONSORT-PRO Extension Guidelines for Patient-Reported Outcomes in Randomized Controlled Trials Focused on Peripheral Nerve Blocks: A Meta-epidemiological Study.Pain and therapy · 2025Article
- Design, analysis, and reporting of pilot and feasibility trials in anesthesiology: a methodological study.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2025Review
- Evaluation of Reporting Quality of Glaucoma Randomized Controlled Trial Abstracts: Current Status and Future Perspectives.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Reporting Quality of the Abstracts for Randomized Controlled Trials in Pediatric Dentistry.European journal of dentistry · 2023Article
- Review
- Time to Publication for Randomized Clinical Trials Presented as Abstracts at Three Gastroenterology and Hepatology Conferences in 2017.Gastro hep advances · 2023Article
- Include or not to include conference abstracts in systematic reviews? Lessons learned from a large Cochrane network meta-analysis including 585 trials.Systematic reviews · 2022Article
- Article
- Evaluation of reporting quality of abstracts of randomized controlled trials regarding patients with COVID-19 using the CONSORT statement for abstracts.International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases · 2022Article
- Frequency and characteristics of promissory conference abstracts, i.e. abstracts without results, accepted at Cochrane Colloquia 1994-2020.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Article
- Abstracts for reports of randomised trials of COVID-19 interventions had low quality and high spin.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2021Article
- Preferred reporting items for journal and conference abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of diagnostic test accuracy studies (PRISMA-DTA for Abstracts): checklist, explanation, and elaboration.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2021Article
- Article
- Article
- The Adaptive designs CONSORT Extension (ACE) statement: a checklist with explanation and elaboration guideline for reporting randomised trials that use an adaptive design.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2020Article
- The effect of the CONSORT statement on the amount of "unclear" Risk of Bias reporting in Cochrane Systematic Reviews.PloS one · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to assess adherence to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) extension for Abstracts (CONSORT-A) in the highest-impact anesthesiology journals.
methodsThis was a descriptive, cross-sectional, methodological study. We analyzed whether abstracts of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in the highest-impact anesthesiology journals between 2014 and 2016 adhered with CONSORT-A. RCT abstracts published in the seven first-quartile journals in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) category Anesthesiology were analyzed. The primary outcome was adherence to the 17-item CONSORT-A checklist. Secondary outcomes were adherence to individual checklist items and adherence with the checklist across the individual journals.
resultsSearch results yielded 688 records, of which 622 abstracts were analyzed. Analysis of the total score of the CONSORT-A checklist indicated a per-article median of 41% (interquartile range 35-53%). The European Journal of Anesthesiology had the highest overall adherence rate (53%), whereas Anaesthesia had the lowest (32%). The lowest adherence was observed for the following items: Trial design (18%), Contact of the authors as an e-mail address of the corresponding author (16%), Recruitment status (9%), Number of participants analyzed (8%), Randomization (3%), and Funding (0.2%).
conclusionsRCT abstracts published in top anesthesiology journals are poorly reported, providing insufficient information to readers. Interventions are needed to increase adherence to relevant reporting checklists for writing RCT abstracts.
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.