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
. 2013 Nov 19;13(1):44.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2253-13-44.

A look at the potential association between PICOT framing of a research question and the quality of reporting of analgesia RCTs

Affiliations

A look at the potential association between PICOT framing of a research question and the quality of reporting of analgesia RCTs

Victoria Borg Debono et al. BMC Anesthesiol. .

Abstract

Background: Methodologists have proposed the formation of a good research question to initiate the process of developing a research protocol that will guide the design, conduct and analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and help improve the quality of reporting such studies. Five constituents of a good research question based on the PICOT framing include: Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, and Time-frame of outcome assessment. The aim of this study was to analyze if the presence a structured research question, in PICOT format, in RCTs used within a 2010 meta-analysis investigating the effectiveness of femoral nerve blocks after total knee arthroplasty, is independently associated with improved quality of reporting.

Methods: Twenty-three RCT reports were assessed for the quality of reporting and then examined for the presence of the five constituents of a structured research question based on PICOT framing. We created a PICOT score (predictor variable), with a possible score between 0 and 5; one point for every constituent that was included. Our outcome variable was a 14 point overall reporting quality score (OQRS) and a 3 point key methodological items score (KMIS) based on the proper reporting of allocation concealment, blinding and numbers analysed using the intention-to-treat principle. Both scores, OQRS and KMIS, are based on the Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement. A multivariable regression analysis was conducted to determine if PICOT score was independently associated with OQRS and KMIS.

Results: A completely structured PICOT score question was found in 2 of the 23 RCTs evaluated. Although not statistically significant, higher PICOT was associated with higher OQRS [IRR: 1.267; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.984, 1.630; p = 0.066] but not KMIS (1.061 (0.515, 2.188); 0.872). These results are comparable to those from a similar study in terms of the direction and range of IRRs estimates. The results need to be interpreted cautiously due to the small sample size.

Conclusions: This study showed that PICOT framing of a research question in anesthesia-related RCTs is not often followed. Even though a statistically significant association with higher OQRS was not found, PICOT framing of a research question is still an important attribute within all RCTs.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Borg Debono V, Zhang S, Ye C, Paul J, Arya A, Hurlburt L, Murthy Y, Thabane L. The quality of reporting of RCTs used within a postoperative pain management meta-analysis, using the CONSORT statement. BMC Anesthesiol. 2012;12(1):13. doi: 10.1186/1471-2253-12-13. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Paul JE, Arya A, Hurlburt L, Cheng J, Thabane L, Tidy A, Murthy Y. Femoral nerve block improves analgesia outcomes after total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Anesthesiology. 2010;113(5):1144–1162. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181f4b18. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Rios LP, Odueyungbo A, Moitri MO, Rahman MO, Thabane L. Quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials in general endocrinology literature. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2008;93(10):3810–3816. doi: 10.1210/jc.2008-0817. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Altman DG. The scandal of poor medical research. BMJ. 1994;308(6924):283–284. doi: 10.1136/bmj.308.6924.283. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Scales CD, Norris RD, Keitz SA, Peterson BL, Preminger GM, Vieweg J, Dahm P. A critical assessment of the quality of reporting of randomized, controlled trials in the urology literature. J Urol. 2007;177(3):1090–1094. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2006.10.027. discussion 1094–5. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources