↓ Skip to main content

Reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in patients with HIV on antiretroviral therapy: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
Title
Reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in patients with HIV on antiretroviral therapy: a systematic review
Published in
Trials, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13063-017-2360-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kaori Nagai, Akiko M. Saito, Toshiki I. Saito, Noriyo Kaneko

Abstract

To allow for correct evaluation of clinical trial results, readers require comprehensive, clear, and highly transparent information on the methodology used and the results obtained. This study aimed to evaluate the quality of reporting in articles on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of antiretroviral therapy (ART) in the field of HIV/AIDS. We searched for original articles on RCTs of ART developed in the field of HIV/AIDS in PubMed database by 5 April 2016. Searched articles were divided into three groups based on the revision year in which the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines were published: Period 1 (1996-2001); Period 2 (2002-2010); and Period 3 (2011-2016). We evaluated the articles using the reporting rates of the 37 items in the CONSORT 2010 checklist, five items in the protocol deviation, and the three items in the ethics. Fifty-two articles were extracted and included in this study. Many of the reporting rates calculated using the CONSORT 2010 checklist showed a significantly increasing trend over the successive periods (65% in Period 1, 67% in Period 2, 79% in Period 3; p < 0.0001). The items with reporting rates < 50% were "the presence or absence of a protocol change and the reason for such a change," "randomization and blinding," and "where the full trial protocol can be accessed." Reporting rates of deviations were as low as < 30%, while the reporting rates for patient compliance were the highest (>80% in Period 3) among the five items. The reporting rates for obtaining informed consent and approval by the ethics committee or institutional review board were high (>88%), regardless of the time period assessed. In terms of representative RCT articles in the field of HIV/AIDS, the reporting rate of the items defined by CONSORT was approximately 70%, improving over the successive CONSORT statement revision periods.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 18%
Other 4 12%
Student > Bachelor 4 12%
Researcher 4 12%
Librarian 3 9%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 8 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 29%
Arts and Humanities 2 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Other 7 21%
Unknown 9 26%