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
Review
. 2020 Nov 7;25(6):445-454.
doi: 10.4103/ijnmr.IJNMR_223_19. eCollection 2020 Nov-Dec.

Compliance of Published Randomized Controlled Trials on the Effect of Physical Activity on Primary Dysmenorrhea with the Consortium's Integrated Report on Clinical Trials Statement: A Critical Appraisal of the Literature

Elham Manouchehri  1 , Somayeh Alirezaei  2 , Robab Latifnejad Roudsari  3   4
Affiliations
Review

Compliance of Published Randomized Controlled Trials on the Effect of Physical Activity on Primary Dysmenorrhea with the Consortium's Integrated Report on Clinical Trials Statement: A Critical Appraisal of the Literature

Elham Manouchehri et al. Iran J Nurs Midwifery Res. .

Abstract

Background: Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) are reliable methods for the evaluation of treatment effectiveness, which should be rigorous and must report with clarity. This study aimed to assess the compliance of published RCTs about the effect of physical activity on primary dysmenorrhea with the CONSORT 2017 statement.

Materials and methods: In this study, the review of literature was carried out based on Consolidated Standards Of Reporting Trials (CONSORT). All the clinical trials focused on the effect of the physical activity on primary dysmenorrhea indexed in Web of Science, Pubmed, Scopus, Google Scholar, Science Direct, Embase, Magiran and Scientific Information Database (SID) were searched using keywords of dysmenorrhea, randomized clinical trial, physical activity and exercise from 2000 to 2019. Out of 1423 articles, 30 RCTs were critically appraised using CONSORT 2017 checklist. The reporting quality score of articles was identified between zero and 43.

Results: The compliance rate with the CONSORT checklist was 55.58%. The mean (SD) score of the reporting quality was 23.37 (-5.15) with a minimum of 16 and a maximum of 37. The maximum weakness was in reporting the sample size and full trial protocol 23.33% and 6.67% respectively. Regarding new items of the consort 2017, if the blinding was not possible, the description of any attempts to limit bias was not described in 70% of articles.

Conclusions: Reporting sample size, trial protocol, method of blinding, and control of bias are issues that require more attention in reporting of RCT studies. We recommend that the authors use the CONSORT 2017 statement for conducting and reporting the clinical trials.

Keywords: Exersice; dysmenorrhea; randomized controlled trial; review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Nothing to declare.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowchart Process for selecting articles
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Uetani K, Nakayama T, Ikai H, Yonemoto N, Moher D. Quality of reports on randomized controlled trials conducted in Japan: Evaluation of adherence to the CONSORT statement. Intern Med. 2009;48:307–13. - PubMed
    1. Shein-Chung C, Liu J. Design and Analysis of Clinical Trials: Concepts and Methodologies. Wiley. 2013
    1. Jo JK, Autorino R, Chung JH, Kim KS, Lee JW, Baek EJ, et al. Randomized controlled trials in endourology: A quality assessment. J Endourol. 2013;27:1055–60. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Altman DG. Endorsement of the CONSORT statement by high impact medical journals: Survey of instructions for authors. BMJ. 2005;330:1056–7. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gagnier J, Boon H, Rochon P, Barnes J, Moher D, Bombardier C, et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials evaluating herbal interventions: Implementing the CONSORT statement [corrected] Explore (NY) 2006;2:143–9. - PubMed