The CONSORT Statement
- 1 May 1999
- journal article
- review article
- Published by American Medical Association (AMA) in Archives of Ophthalmology (1950)
- Vol. 117 (5) , 677-680
- https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.117.5.677
Abstract
JAMA Beyond CONSORT: Need for Improved Reporting Standards for Clinical Trials Curtis L. Meinert, PhD. The increasing use of trials as vehicles for choosing among treatments has fueled drives for standardizing the way trials are reported. These drives have been propelled by editors, frustrated readers, and meta-analysts desiring the same basic information and counts. There is no doubt that all of these groups would benefit from better reporting of trials and by analyses subsumed under the heading analysis by treatment assignment or analysis by intention to treat. To that end, there are reasons to applaud the efforts of biomedical journals to support the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement. Content suggestions and checklists are useful in preparing reports of trials. Hence, the CONSORT checklist is useful. A worthwhile addition to the list would be an item on treatment effects monitoring, since monitoring is part and parcel of most randomized trials. Reprints:Curtis L. Meinert, PhD, Johns Hopkins University Center for Clinical Trials, 615 N Wolfe St, Room 5010, Baltimore, MD 21305 (e-mail: cmeinert@jhoph.edu). Arch Ophthalmol 1999;117:677-680Keywords
This publication has 18 references indexed in Scilit:
- Publications from multicentre clinical trials: Statistical techniques and accessibility to the readerStatistics in Medicine, 1994
- Clinical studies in surgical journals—have we improved?Diseases of the Colon & Rectum, 1993
- A Methodological Review of Non-Therapeutic Intervention Trials Employing Cluster Randomization, 1979–1989International Journal of Epidemiology, 1990
- An empirical study of the possible relation of treatment differences to quality scores in controlled randomized clinical trialsControlled Clinical Trials, 1990
- Randomisation and baseline comparisons in clinical trialsThe Lancet, 1990
- Publication bias and clinical trialsControlled Clinical Trials, 1987
- Standards for the use of ordinal scales in clinical trials.BMJ, 1986
- Content of reports on clinical trials: A critical reviewControlled Clinical Trials, 1984
- Reporting on Methods in Clinical TrialsNew England Journal of Medicine, 1982
- A method for assessing the quality of a randomized control trialControlled Clinical Trials, 1981