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
. 2014 Aug 20:9:94.
doi: 10.1186/s13012-014-0094-z.

A systematic review of the quality of reporting in published smoking cessation trials for pregnant women: an explanation for the evidence-practice gap?

Jamie Bryant  1 , Megan E Passey, Alix E Hall, Rob W Sanson-Fisher
Affiliations

A systematic review of the quality of reporting in published smoking cessation trials for pregnant women: an explanation for the evidence-practice gap?

Jamie Bryant et al. Implement Sci. .

Abstract

Background: To facilitate translation of evidence into clinical practice, it is critical that clear, specific, and detailed information about interventions is provided in publications to promote replication, appropriate aggregation in meta-analysis, and implementation. This study examined whether twenty elements of interventions deemed essential for such translational application were reported in sufficient detail in smoking cessation trials with pregnant women.

Methods: Searches of electronic databases using MeSH terms and keywords identified peer-reviewed English language studies published between 2001 and 2012. Eligible studies reported a smoking cessation intervention targeted at pregnant women and met Cochrane's Effective Practice and Organization of Care group study design criteria. Each intervention arm of eligible studies was assessed against the developed twenty criteria.

Results: Thirty relevant studies reported the findings of 45 intervention arms. The mode of delivery of the intervention was reported in 100% of intervention arms. Other well-reported criteria included reporting of the provider who delivered the intervention (96%), sample characteristics (80%), and the intervention setting (80%). Criteria not reported adequately included care provided to women who relapse (96% not reported), details about training given to providers (77% not reported), and the method of quit advice advised (76% not reported). No studies reported 100% of relevant criteria.

Conclusions: Current standards of reporting of intervention content and implementation are suboptimal. The use of smoking cessation specific checklists for reporting of trials, standard reporting using behaviour change taxonomies, and the publication of protocols as supplements should be considered as ways of improving the specificity of reporting.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart of search strategy, study selection and assignment.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Concato J, Shah N, Horwitz RI. Randomized, controlled trials, observational studies, and the hierarchy of research designs. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:1887–1892. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200006223422507. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Muma JR. The need for replication. J Speech Hear Res. 1993;36:927–930. doi: 10.1044/jshr.3605.927. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Higgins JPT, Green S (Eds): Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. ᅟ: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011. Available from ., [www.cochrane-handbook.org]
    1. von Elm E, Altman D, Egger M, Pocock S, Gøtzsche P, Vandenbroucke J. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61:344–349. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.11.008. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Altman DG. The scandal of poor medical research. BMJ. 1994;308:283–284. doi: 10.1136/bmj.308.6924.283. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms