Title
CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials
Date Issued
01 January 2010
Access level
open access
Resource Type
journal article
Author(s)
Moher D.
Hopewell S.
Schulz K.F.
Gøtzsche P.C.
Devereaux P.J.
Elbourne D.
Egger M.
Altman D.G.
Mayo Clinic
Publisher(s)
Elsevier USA
Abstract
Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and validity of trial findings nor extract information for systematic reviews. Recent methodological analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which are considered the gold standard for evaluating interventions because of their ability to minimise or avoid bias. A group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. It was first published in 1996 and updated in 2001. The statement consists of a checklist and flow diagram that authors can use for reporting an RCT. Many leading medical journals and major international editorial groups have endorsed the CONSORT statement. The statement facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs. During the 2001 CONSORT revision, it became clear that explanation and elaboration of the principles underlying the CONSORT statement would help investigators and others to write or appraise trial reports. A CONSORT explanation and elaboration article was published in 2001 alongside the 2001 version of the CONSORT statement. After an expert meeting in January 2007, the CONSORT statement has been further revised and is published as the CONSORT 2010 Statement. This update improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias. This explanatory and elaboration document-intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the CONSORT statement-has also been extensively revised. It presents the meaning and rationale for each new and updated checklist item providing examples of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies. Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT 2010 Statement, this revised explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated website (www.consort-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomised trials. © 2010 Moher et al.
Volume
63
Issue
8
Language
English
OCDE Knowledge area
Políticas de salud, Servicios de salud
Salud pública, Salud ambiental
Publication version
Version of Record
Scopus EID
2-s2.0-77953611072
PubMed ID
Source
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
ISSN of the container
0895-4356
Sponsor(s)
Funding: We gratefully acknowledge financial support from United Kingdom National Institute for Health Research; Canadian Institutes of Health Research; Presidents Fund, Canadian Institutes of Health Research; Johnson & Johnson; BMJ ; and the American Society for Clinical Oncology .
“This study was funded by GlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceuticals. GlaxoSmithKline was involved in the design and conduct of the study and provided logistical support during the trial. Employees of the sponsor worked with the investigators to prepare the statistical analysis plan, but the analyses were performed by the University of Utah. The manuscript was prepared by Dr Shaddy and the steering committee members. GlaxoSmithKline was permitted to review the manuscript and suggest changes, but the final decision on content was exclusively retained by the authors” [296] .
Sources of information:
Directorio de Producción Científica
Scopus
Scopus