Effect of editors’ implementation of CONSORT guidelines on the reporting of abstracts in high impact medical journals: interrupted time series analysis

Objective To investigate the effect of the CONSORT for Abstracts guidelines, and different editorial policies used by five leading general medical journals to implement the guidelines, on the reporting quality of abstracts of randomised trials. Design Interrupted time series analysis. Sample We randomly selected up to 60 primary reports of randomised trials per journal per year from five high impact, general medical journals in 2006-09, if indexed in PubMed with an electronic abstract. We excluded reports that did not include an electronic abstract, and any secondary trial publications or economic analyses. We classified journals in three categories: those not mentioning the guidelines in their instructions to authors (JAMA and New England Journal of Medicine), those referring to the guidelines in their instructions to authors but with no specific policy to implement them (BMJ), and those referring to the guidelines in their instructions to authors with an active policy to implement them (Annals of Internal Medicine and Lancet). Two authors extracted data independently using the CONSORT for Abstracts checklist. Main outcome Mean number of CONSORT items reported in selected abstracts, among nine items reported in fewer than 50% of the abstracts published across the five journals in 2006. Results We assessed 955 reports of abstracts of randomised trials. Journals with an active policy to enforce the guidelines showed an immediate increase in the level of mean number of items reported (increase of 1.50 items; P=0.0037). At 23 months after publication of the guidelines, the mean number of items reported per abstract for the primary outcome was 5.41 of nine items, a 53% increase compared with the expected level estimated on the basis of pre-intervention trends. The change in level or trend did not increase in journals with no policy to enforce the guidelines (BMJ, JAMA, and New England Journal of Medicine). Conclusion Active implementation of the CONSORT for Abstracts guidelines by journals can lead to improvements in the reporting of abstracts of randomised trials.

[1]  K. Knobloch,et al.  Quality of reporting in sports injury prevention abstracts according to the CONSORT and STROBE criteria: an analysis of the World Congress of Sports Injury Prevention in 2005 and 2008 , 2009, British Journal of Sports Medicine.

[2]  M. Cabana,et al.  Why don't physicians follow clinical practice guidelines? A framework for improvement. , 1999, JAMA.

[3]  Andrew D Oxman,et al.  Closing the gap between research and practice : an overview of systematic reviews of interventions to promote the implementation of research findings , 2011 .

[4]  J Froom,et al.  Deficiencies in structured medical abstracts. , 1993, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[5]  CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials , 2011, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[6]  Jack Froom,et al.  Presentation Deficiencies in structured medical abstracts , 1993 .

[7]  S. Woolf Practice guidelines: a new reality in medicine. III. Impact on patient care. , 1993, Archives of internal medicine.

[8]  D. Moher,et al.  CONSORT 2010 statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials , 2010, Journal of pharmacology & pharmacotherapeutics.

[9]  R M Pitkin,et al.  Accuracy of data in abstracts of published research articles. , 1999, JAMA.

[10]  T. Wachs,et al.  CONSORT for reporting randomised trials in journal and conference abstracts , 2008 .

[11]  A K Wagner,et al.  Segmented regression analysis of interrupted time series studies in medication use research , 2002, Journal of clinical pharmacy and therapeutics.

[12]  D. Cook,et al.  The quality of reporting of trial abstracts is suboptimal: survey of major general medical journals. , 2009, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[13]  M. Can,et al.  Has the quality of abstracts for randomised controlled trials improved since the release of Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trial guideline for abstract reporting? A survey of four high-profile anaesthesia journals , 2011, European journal of anaesthesiology.

[14]  D. Moher,et al.  CONSORT for Reporting Randomized Controlled Trials in Journal and Conference Abstracts: Explanation and Elaboration , 2008, PLoS medicine.

[15]  Sally Hopewell,et al.  Better reporting of randomized trials in biomedical journal and conference abstracts , 2008, J. Inf. Sci..

[16]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  Completeness of safety reporting in randomized trials: an evaluation of 7 medical areas. , 2001, JAMA.

[17]  V. Montori,et al.  An analysis of general medical and specialist journals that endorse CONSORT found that reporting was not enforced consistently. , 2005, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[18]  G. Yamey,et al.  The Impact of Open Access upon Public Health , 2006, PLoS Medicine.

[19]  D. Moher,et al.  CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials , 2010, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[20]  S. Hopewell,et al.  Assessment of the Quality of Reporting in Abstracts of Randomized Controlled Trials Published in Five Leading Chinese Medical Journals , 2010, PloS one.