UZH-Logo

Quality of randomised trials in COPD


Bausch, B; Spaar, A; Kleijnen, J; Puhan, M A (2009). Quality of randomised trials in COPD. European Respiratory Journal, 34(5):1060-1065.

Abstract

Randomised trials can provide high-level evidence to inform treatment decisions. Since their quality in respiratory medicine is largely unknown, we assessed the quality of a large set of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) trials. As a marker of trial quality, we assessed the procedure and concealment of random allocation, and the conduct of an intention-to-treat-analysis in 344 randomised trials published between 1957 and 2006. We used ordered logistic regression to assess the association between trial quality and type of intervention, type of journal, journal impact factor and year of publication. 257 (75%) trials assessed pharmacological and 87 (25%) assessed nonpharmacological interventions. The generation of appropriate randomisation was reported in 27.0% of the trials, concealment of random allocation in 11.6% and an intention-to-treat analysis in 21.8% of trials. Significantly higher quality was found in trials on nonpharmacological interventions (OR 2.49, 95% CI 1.56-3.99), and in trials published in general medical journals (versus specialised journals; OR 2.25, 95% CI 1.30-3.90) and after 2000 (versus 1957-2000; OR 2.28, 95% CI 1.45-3.58). The association of quality with a high impact factor was of borderline significance (p = 0.06). The quality of many COPD trials is low but tends to become better since the adoption of the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement.

Randomised trials can provide high-level evidence to inform treatment decisions. Since their quality in respiratory medicine is largely unknown, we assessed the quality of a large set of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) trials. As a marker of trial quality, we assessed the procedure and concealment of random allocation, and the conduct of an intention-to-treat-analysis in 344 randomised trials published between 1957 and 2006. We used ordered logistic regression to assess the association between trial quality and type of intervention, type of journal, journal impact factor and year of publication. 257 (75%) trials assessed pharmacological and 87 (25%) assessed nonpharmacological interventions. The generation of appropriate randomisation was reported in 27.0% of the trials, concealment of random allocation in 11.6% and an intention-to-treat analysis in 21.8% of trials. Significantly higher quality was found in trials on nonpharmacological interventions (OR 2.49, 95% CI 1.56-3.99), and in trials published in general medical journals (versus specialised journals; OR 2.25, 95% CI 1.30-3.90) and after 2000 (versus 1957-2000; OR 2.28, 95% CI 1.45-3.58). The association of quality with a high impact factor was of borderline significance (p = 0.06). The quality of many COPD trials is low but tends to become better since the adoption of the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement.

Citations

6 citations in Web of Science®
7 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Clinic and Policlinic for Internal Medicine
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:2009
Deposited On:01 Mar 2010 14:16
Last Modified:05 Apr 2016 13:58
Publisher:European Respiratory Society
ISSN:0903-1936
Free access at:Publisher DOI. An embargo period may apply.
Publisher DOI:10.1183/09031936.00159108
PubMed ID:19574328

Download

Full text not available from this repository.View at publisher

TrendTerms

TrendTerms displays relevant terms of the abstract of this publication and related documents on a map. The terms and their relations were extracted from ZORA using word statistics. Their timelines are taken from ZORA as well. The bubble size of a term is proportional to the number of documents where the term occurs. Red, orange, yellow and green colors are used for terms that occur in the current document; red indicates high interlinkedness of a term with other terms, orange, yellow and green decreasing interlinkedness. Blue is used for terms that have a relation with the terms in this document, but occur in other documents.
You can navigate and zoom the map. Mouse-hovering a term displays its timeline, clicking it yields the associated documents.

Author Collaborations