AI Article Synopsis
- The study aimed to assess how many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reported the number of patients evaluated for eligibility before randomization, focusing on research published between 2013 and 2015 in major oncology journals.
- Out of 456 reviewed RCTs, 236 (51.8%) provided information on patient eligibility and 184 of those (78%) detailed reasons for patient exclusion.
- The findings suggest that while most trials included flow diagrams, only a minority discussed the generalizability of results, indicating a need for better adherence to reporting guidelines to improve clarity on trial applicability.
Article Abstract
Our primary objective was to determine the proportion of trials that report the number of patients assessed for eligibility before randomization. We performed the systematic retrieval and analysis of all phase II, III, and IV RCTs published between 2013 and 2015 in four high-impact-factor journals in the field of clinical oncology. Among 456 RCTs reviewed, 236 trials (51.8%) reported the number of patients assessed for eligibility. Among the 236 trials that reported the entire enrollment process, the reasons for patient exclusion could be found in 184 trials (78%). A flow diagram was presented in 452 trials (99.1%), and 98 trials (21.5%) included a discussion on generalizability. Reporting the parameters of external validity in medical oncology RCTs is challenging. Improving adherence to the 2010 CONSORT guidelines concerning the enrollment process could help clinicians and health policymakers establish to whom trial results apply.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9955486 | PMC |
| http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/curroncol30020160 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!