The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Quality of reporting in randomized trials published in high-quality surgical journals

Sinha, Sidhartha, Sinha, Shrestha, Ashby, Elizabeth, Jayaram, Raja and Grocott, Michael P.W. (2009) Quality of reporting in randomized trials published in high-quality surgical journals Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 209, (5), 565-571.e1. (doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2009.07.019).

Record type: Article


Background: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in surgery can provide valuable evidence of the efficacy of interventions if they are well-designed, appropriately executed, and adequately reported. Adequate reporting of methodology in surgical RCTs is known to be poor, and adverse-event reporting in surgical research is inconsistent. The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement is a framework to help authors report their findings in a transparent manner. Extensions to the CONSORT statement have been published recently to address deficiencies in adverse-event reporting and in reporting of specific criteria related to nonpharmacologic treatments. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of reporting of trial methodology and adverse events in a sample of general surgical RCTs published in high-quality surgical journals using the criteria specified in the CONSORT statements.

Study Design: We used impact factor to identify the top three ranked surgical journals in 2004. We then obtained information on all RCTs published in these journals in the 2005 calendar year. We assessed quality of reporting using Jadad score, compared the quality of RCTs from CONSORT-endorsing journals with nonendorsers, and assessed the number of RCTs adequately reporting key generic methodologic, adverse-event?related, and specific nonpharmacologic criteria.

Results: Of 42 RCTs analyzed, only 40% (17 of 42) had a Jadad score ?3. There was no significant difference in the number of high-quality RCTs published in CONSORT-endorsing journals compared with nonendorsers (p = 0.3). The median percentage of RCTs adequately reporting generic methodologic, adverse-event?related, and specific nonpharmacologic criteria was 32.5%, 17%, and 36.5%, respectively.

Conclusions: Quality of reporting of generic methodologic, adverse-event?related, and specific nonpharmacologic criteria in surgical RCTs is poor. Increased attention to quality of reporting of surgical RCTs is required if studies are to meet published criteria.

Full text not available from this repository.

More information

Published date: November 2009


Local EPrints ID: 73616
PURE UUID: 3548efac-869d-4c2c-bf9b-2f521c708c33

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 10 Mar 2010
Last modified: 18 Jul 2017 23:49

Export record



Author: Sidhartha Sinha
Author: Shrestha Sinha
Author: Elizabeth Ashby
Author: Raja Jayaram

University divisions

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton:

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.