Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31401718›Full record

ReviewJournal of thrombosis and thrombolysis2019

Assessment of the reporting quality of RCTs for novel oral anticoagulants in venous thromboembolic disease based on the CONSORT statement.

Ioannis Liampas, Antonios Chlinos, Vasileios Siokas, Alexandros Brotis, Efthimios Dardiotis

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. FAIR reporting of clinical trials for public health practice.Proceedings of the European Academy of Sciences & Arts · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ioannis LiampasDepartment of Neurology, School of Medicine, University Hospital of Larissa, University of Thessaly, Biopolis, Mezourlo Hill, 41100, Larissa, Greece. liampasioannes@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2958-5220
Antonios ChlinosDepartment of Neurology, School of Medicine, University Hospital of Larissa, University of Thessaly, Biopolis, Mezourlo Hill, 41100, Larissa, Greece.
Vasileios SiokasDepartment of Neurology, School of Medicine, University Hospital of Larissa, University of Thessaly, Biopolis, Mezourlo Hill, 41100, Larissa, Greece.
Alexandros BrotisDepartment of Neurosurgery, School of Medicine, University Hospital of Larissa, University of Thessaly, Larissa, Greece.
Efthimios DardiotisDepartment of Neurology, School of Medicine, University Hospital of Larissa, University of Thessaly, Biopolis, Mezourlo Hill, 41100, Larissa, Greece.
University of Thessaly · GR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the cornerstone of evidence based medicine. Ιt is crucial that RCTs have transparent reporting to facilitate their interpretation. The purpose of the present study is the evaluation of the reporting quality of RCTs for novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in venous thromboembolism (VTE) based on the CONSORT statement. MEDLINE was meticulously searched, while quoted references by retrieved RCTs were manually screened. The primary objective was to establish the mean CONSORT compliance of RCTs for NOACs in VTE. Secondary objectives were the calculation of compliance per CONSORT item and the investigation for probable determining factors with regards to the reporting quality of RCTs. Reporting above 70% of the items was defined as adequate compliance to the CONSORT statement. A total of 83 articles were considered eligible. Mean adherence to the CONSORT statement was 61.84%, standard deviation (SD) = 18.72. Among retrieved studies, 35 (42.17%) reported above 70% of the items, while 48 (57.83%) described less than 70% of the items. Inter-rater agreement was satisfactory (Cohen's kappa ≥ 0.75). Items with respect to randomization and blinding were principally underreported, whereas the rest of the methodological features and results were more sufficiently reported. Logistic regression failed to demonstrate significant effect for any of the factors investigated. Impact factor [odds ratio (OR) = 1.347, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.994, 1.826), p = 0.055], number of authors [OR = 1.277, 95% CI (0.975, 1.672), p = 0.076] and presentation of participant flow-diagram [OR = 55.358, 95% CI (0.914, 3351.765), p = 0.055], came closer to significance. Exploratory analysis revealed significant, strong, positive correlation between abstract and article adherence to the CONSORT guidelines (r = 0.851, p < 0.001). Reporting quality of RCTs for NOACs in VTE is moderate. A superior reporting quality is desirable, especially relating to randomization and blinding.

Indexed as

Administration, OralAnticoagulantsGuideline AdherenceHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicVenous ThromboembolismAnticoagulantsCONSORTDeep vein thrombosisNew Oral AnticoagulantsPulmonary embolismRandomized Controlled TrialsVenous thromboembolism

Identifiers

PMID31401718
OpenAlexW2968015619

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.