期刊文献+

CONSORT 2010说明与详述:报告平行对照随机临床试验指南的更新 被引量:352

CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration:updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (Chinese version)
在线阅读 下载PDF
导出
摘要 大量证据显示随机对照临床试验(randomised controlled trial,RCT)的报告质量不理想。报告不透明,则读者既不能评判试验结果是否真实可靠,也不能从中提取可用于系统综述的信息。最近的方法学分析表明,报告不充分和设计不合理与对治疗效果产生评价偏倚有关。这种系统误差对RCT损害严重,而RCT正是以其能减少或避免偏倚而被视为评价干预措施的金标准。为了提高RCT的报告质量,一个由专家和编辑组成的工作组制定了临床试验报告的统一标准(Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials,CONSORT)声明。CONSORT声明于1996年首次发表,并于2001年更新。声明由对照检查清单和流程图组成,供作者在报告RCT时使用。许多核心医学期刊和主要国际性编辑组织都已认可CONSORT声明。该声明促进了对RCT的严格评价和解释。2001年,在对CONSORT进行修订时,人们就已经清楚地认识到,解释和说明制定CONSORT声明的原理,有助于研究人员等撰写或评价临床试验报告。一篇CONSORT说明与详述文章于2001年同2001版CONSORT声明一起发表。2007年1月的专家会议之后,对CONSORT声明作了进一步修订并已发表,即"CONSORT2010声明"。这次更新对原版对照检查清单作了文字上的修改,使其更为明晰,并收入了与一些新近才认识到的主题相关的建议,如选择性报告结局产生的偏倚。说明与详述文件旨在加强人们对CONSORT声明的理解、应用和传播,这次也作了大量修订,对每一项新增或更新的清单条目的含义和增改理由进行了解释,提供了优秀的报告实例,还尽可能地提供了相关的经验性研究的参考文献。文中收入了若干流程图实例。"CONSORT2010声明"、其说明与详述文件,以及相关网站(www.consort-statement.org),对于改进随机临床试验报告必将有所裨益。 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.
出处 《中西医结合学报》 CAS 2010年第8期701-741,共41页 Journal of Chinese Integrative Medicine
基金 United Kingdom National Institute for Health Research Canadian Institutes of Health Research Presidents Fund Canadian Institutes of Health Research Johnson & Johnson BMJ the American Society for Clinical Oncology
关键词 临床试验 随机对照试验 指南 CONSORT clinical trials randomized controlled trials guidelines CONSORT
  • 相关文献

参考文献1

二级参考文献30

  • 1National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit.A Classified Bibliography of Controlled Trials In Perinatal Medicine 1940-1984.Oxford:Oxford University Press (for the World Health Organization),1985.
  • 2Simes RJ.Publication bias:the case for an international registry of clinical trials.JClin Oncology,1986; 4:1529 1541.
  • 3Hetherington J,Dickersin K,Chalmers I,et al.Retrospective and prospective identification of unpublished controlled trials:lessons from a survey of obstetricians and pediatricians.Pediatrics,1989;84:374-380.
  • 4Chalmers I.Under-reporting research is scientific misconduct.JAMA,1990; 263:1405-1408.
  • 5Hemminki E.Study of information submitted by drug companies to licensing authorities.BMJ,1980; 280:833-836.
  • 6Lock S,Wells F.Preface to the second edition.In:Lock S,Wells F,eds.Fraud and Misconduct In Medical Research.London:BMJ Publishing Group,1996:xi-xii.
  • 7Sykes R.Being a modern pharmaceutical company.BMJ,1998;317:1172.
  • 8Gibbs T,Wager E.Realities of trial registration:the Glaxo Wellcome experience.IntJPharmaceut Med,2000; 14:203-105.
  • 9Wager E,Field EA,Grossman L.Good Publication Practice for pharmaceutical companies.Curr Med Res Opinion,2003; 19:149-154.
  • 10http://www.gpp-guidelines.org

共引文献1

同被引文献5040

引证文献352

二级引证文献2651

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部