The Evaluation of a CONSORT Based Online Writing Tool: a Randomized Controlled Trial
试验速览
- 阶段
- 不适用
- 状态
- 已完成
- 入组人数
- 41
- 试验地点
- 2
- 主要终点
- The Primary Outcome Will be the Average Score for Completeness of Reporting on a Scale of 0-10.
研究概览
简要总结
Introduction: Inadequate reporting is a frequent cause of waste of research. For example, essential information for evaluating the risk of bias such as the method of randomization is lacking in 75% of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and over 30% of reports do not provide sufficient details to allow replication of the treatment evaluated in the trial in clinical practice. To overcome this issue, the CONSORT statement, an evidence-based, minimum set of recommendations for reporting RCTs was developed in 1996. These guidelines have since been updated in 2001 and more recently in 2010. In addition, extensions to the main CONSORT statement have been developed to give additional guidance for RCTs with specific designs (eg cluster), data (eg harm), and interventions (eg nonpharmacologic treatments). Many journals endorse the CONSORT statement. Some journals provide recommendations to authors to follow the CONSORT guidelines and some editors enforce the use of the CONSORT guidelines by requesting authors to submit a checklist in either the submission or acceptance stage. Nevertheless, inadequate reporting remains.
Our objective is to evaluate the impact of the CONSORT based online writing tool on the completeness of reporting.
详细描述
Context Inadequate reporting is a frequent cause of waste of research. For example, essential information for evaluating the risk of bias such as the method of randomization is lacking in 75% of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and over 30% of reports do not provide sufficient details to allow replication of the treatment evaluated in the trial in clinical practice. To overcome this issue, the CONSORT statement, an evidence-based, minimum set of recommendations for reporting RCTs was developed in 1996. These guidelines have since been updated in 2001 and more recently in 2010. In addition, extensions to the main CONSORT statement have been developed to give additional guidance for RCTs with specific designs (eg cluster), data (eg harm), and interventions (eg nonpharmacologic treatments). Many journals endorse the CONSORT statement. Some journals provide recommendations to authors to follow the CONSORT guidelines and some editors enforce the use of the CONSORT guidelines by requesting authors to submit a checklist in either the submission or acceptance stage. Nevertheless, inadequate reporting remains.
Hypothesis We hypothesize that to improve reporting, the CONSORT guidelines must be implemented at the stage of the writing of the manuscript instead of at the stage of journal submission or peer review process. We developed a CONSORT based online writing tool to improve the completeness of reporting. This tool focuses on some domains of the methods section of a 2-arm parallel group randomized controlled trial evaluating pharmacologic or nonpharmacologic treatment.
Objective Our objective is to evaluate the impact of the CONSORT based online writing tool on the completeness of reporting.
Methods Study design: We will perform a "split-manuscript" randomized controlled trial, adapted from the split-body design. We will consider 6 domains of the methods section: trial design, randomization, blinding, participants, interventions, and outcomes. The unit of randomization will be the domain and the allocation ratio 1:1. Each study participant will receive the experimental intervention (the tool) for 3 of the 6 domains and the control intervention (no tool) for thther 3 domains.
Participants: Masters and doctoral students Intervention: The use of the online writing tool for writing the methods section of an article from an RCT protocol.
研究设计
- 研究类型
- Interventional
- 分配方式
- Randomized
- 干预模型
- Crossover
- 主要目的
- Other
- 盲法
- Single (Outcomes Assessor)
入排标准
- 年龄范围
- 18 Years 至 —(Adult, Older Adult)
- 性别
- All
- 接受健康志愿者
- 是
入选标准
- 未提供
排除标准
- 未提供
结局指标
主要结局
The Primary Outcome Will be the Average Score for Completeness of Reporting on a Scale of 0-10.
时间窗: one time measure after a four-hour writing session
Completeness of reporting will be determined according to a grading rubric individualized to each study protocol, 0 being the lowest and 10 the highest
次要结局
- The Score for Completeness of Reporting for Trial Design(one time measure after a four-hour writing session)
- The Score for Completeness of Reporting for Randomization(one time measure after a four-hour writing session)
- The Score for Completeness of Reporting for Participants(one time measure after a four-hour writing session)
- The Score for Completeness of Reporting for Blinding(one time measure after a four-hour writing session)
- The Score for Completeness of Reporting for Outcomes(one time measure after a four-hour writing session)
- The Score for Completeness of Reporting for Interventions(one time measure after a four-hour writing session)
- Average Score for Completeness of Reporting of Essential Elements(one time four hour writing session)
