↓ Skip to main content

Reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in otolaryngology: review of adherence to the CONSORT statement

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in otolaryngology: review of adherence to the CONSORT statement
Published in
Journal of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s40463-018-0277-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yu Qing Huang, Katsiaryna Traore, Badr Ibrahim, Maida J. Sewitch, Lily H. P. Nguyen

Abstract

Randomized controlled trials are the gold standard in medical and surgical research to assess the efficacy of therapeutic interventions. The reporting of these trials should be of high quality to allow readers' appropriate interpretation and application. The objectives of our study were to assess the extent to which the recent Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery (ORL-HNS) randomized control trials in the top nine journals and in the top Canadian journal comply with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement, and to identify the CONSORT items most in need of improvement. Based on the impact factor and circulation number of 2014, the top nine Otolaryngology journals and the top Canadian Otolaryngology journal were selected and were searched to identify RCTs published in English and between 2010 and 2014. Two authors independently reviewed and extracted data using a standardized data extraction form constructed with the help of a medical librarian. Our outcome was to assess the adherence of articles reporting to the CONSORT items. Descriptive statistics were used. One hundred and eighty-two Otolaryngologic RCTs were identified in the top nine international journals and in the top Canadian journal. The inter-rater reliability between two raters was 0.32. The extent of adherence to CONSORT Statement ranged from 25 to 93.5% with a mean of 59.0% and a median of 59.4%. Only 6.5% of RCTs described the individual responsible for enrolling and assigning subjects and method of randomization; 32.4% reported the estimated effect size and precision; 40.6% reported a sample size calculation and 32.4% mentioned external validity or implications of the findings. Findings revealed that the reporting of RCTs in the top nine ORL-HNS journals and in the top Canadian ORL-HNS journal is suboptimal. The quality of reporting can be improved by addressing the three CONSORT items found most deficient in this study namely, sample size calculations, estimated effect size and precision, and external validity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Researcher 3 10%
Librarian 2 6%
Professor 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 15 48%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 16 52%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 May 2019.
All research outputs
#16,642,835
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery
#283
of 629 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,215
of 341,179 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery
#5
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 629 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 341,179 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.