Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2005 Feb 7;5(1):7.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-5-7.

Effects of the search technique on the measurement of the change in quality of randomized controlled trials over time in the field of brain injury

Mark K Borsody  1 , Chisa Yamada
Affiliations

Effects of the search technique on the measurement of the change in quality of randomized controlled trials over time in the field of brain injury

Mark K Borsody et al. BMC Med Res Methodol. .

Abstract

Background: To determine if the search technique that is used to sample randomized controlled trial (RCT) manuscripts from a field of medical science can influence the measurement of the change in quality over time in that field.

Methods: RCT manuscripts in the field of brain injury were identified using two readily-available search techniques: (1) a PubMed MEDLINE search, and (2) the Cochrane Injuries Group (CIG) trials registry. Seven criteria of quality were assessed in each manuscript and related to the year-of-publication of the RCT manuscripts by regression analysis.

Results: No change in the frequency of reporting of any individual quality criterion was found in the sample of RCT manuscripts identified by the PubMed MEDLINE search. In the RCT manuscripts of the CIG trials registry, three of the seven criteria showed significant or near-significant increases over time.

Conclusions: We demonstrated that measuring the change in quality over time of a sample of RCT manuscripts from the field of brain injury can be greatly affected by the search technique. This poorly recognized factor may make measurements of the change in RCT quality over time within a given field of medical science unreliable.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Working Group on Recommendations for Reporting of Clinical Trials in the Biomedical Literature Group Call for comments on a proposal to improve reporting of clinical trials in the biomedical literature: a position paper. Ann Intern Med. 1994;121:894–95. - PubMed
    1. The Standards of Reporting Trials Group A proposal for structured reporting of randomized controlled trials. JAMA. 1994;272:1926–31. doi: 10.1001/jama.272.24.1926. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Weiner JP, Gibson G, Munster AM. Use of prophylactic antibiotics in surgical procedures: peer review guidelines as a method for quality assurance. Am J Surg. 1980;139:348–51. doi: 10.1016/0002-9610(80)90291-3. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chalmers TC, Smith H, Blackburn B, Silverman B, Schroeder B, Reitman D, Ambroz A. A method for assessing the quality of a randomized control trial. Control Clin Trials. 1981;2:31–49. doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(81)90056-8. - DOI - PubMed
    1. MacKenzie CR, Charlson ME. Standards for the use of ordinal scales in clinical trials. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1986;292:40–3. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources