QUALITY OF RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS & JOURNAL ABSTRACTS in CANCER NURSING RESEARCH

2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/211455
Type:
Research Study
Title:
QUALITY OF RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS & JOURNAL ABSTRACTS in CANCER NURSING RESEARCH
Abstract:
Purpose: The main aim was to assess the quality of randomized controlled trial (RCT) abstracts in published journal articles in cancer nursing research. The secondary aim was to determine whether the quality of journals and the quality of the full length RCT articles were associated with the quality of RCT abstracts. Background: In 2009, 66% of cancer patients survived at least 5 years beyond diagnosis. Nurses, playing a key role in managing patients' symptoms, health, and quality of life, want to effectively deliver evidence-based practice (EBP) to cancer patients. Published journal articles are a major source of evidence, and an RCT is typically considered the highest level of evidence. A journal article abstract presents the summary of the study. Readers often rely on abstracts to decide whether to access full-length articles. However, little is known about the quality of RCT abstracts in cancer nursing research. Method: Journal articles involving RCTs in cancer nursing research were retrieved from MEDLINE and CINAHL in September 2010. Inclusion criteria were: nursing research, English language, RCT design, and full-text article was available online. Articles were excluded if they were duplicate reports of the same study, or were secondary analysis of RCT data. The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist for reporting RCTs in journal and conference abstracts was used to assess the quality of the abstract. Abstracts were scored as checklist item present in the abstract (adherence to the CONSORT item) or checklist item absent (non-adherence). The Jadad scale (Oxford quality scoring system) was used to assess full length journal articles. Journal impact factor (IF) was used as the measure of journal quality. Results: 114 articles published between 1989 and 2010 were analyzed. This included 48 journals, with IF between .59 and 33.63. The inter-rater agreement Cohen's kappa was .95 overall. Out of 17 items on the CONSORT abstract checklist, 7 items had > 80% adherence (the item was found in more than 80% of abstracts), and 7 items had < 10% adherence, including one, “Trial status”, with 0% adherence. Four items (allocation concealment, blinding, and intent to treat analysis) had adherence rate between 1.8% and 28.1%. Adherence to the CONSORT checklist was significantly associated with both IF (Spearman’s rho=.23, p=.03) and the Jadad score (Spearman’s rho=.30, p=.001). Implications: This study suggests that the quality of reporting RCTs in cancer nursing can be improved. It is recommended that nursing studies adopt standards such as the CONSORT guideline to evaluate and improve reporting quality. The use of the CONSORT guideline may need to be disseminated to nursing researchers.
Keywords:
Cancer nursing research; Articles, abstracts, comparison
Repository Posting Date:
20-Feb-2012
Date of Publication:
20-Feb-2012
Other Identifiers:
5139
Sponsors:
Western Institute of Nursing

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.typeResearch Studyen_GB
dc.titleQUALITY OF RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS & JOURNAL ABSTRACTS in CANCER NURSING RESEARCHen_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/211455-
dc.description.abstractPurpose: The main aim was to assess the quality of randomized controlled trial (RCT) abstracts in published journal articles in cancer nursing research. The secondary aim was to determine whether the quality of journals and the quality of the full length RCT articles were associated with the quality of RCT abstracts. Background: In 2009, 66% of cancer patients survived at least 5 years beyond diagnosis. Nurses, playing a key role in managing patients' symptoms, health, and quality of life, want to effectively deliver evidence-based practice (EBP) to cancer patients. Published journal articles are a major source of evidence, and an RCT is typically considered the highest level of evidence. A journal article abstract presents the summary of the study. Readers often rely on abstracts to decide whether to access full-length articles. However, little is known about the quality of RCT abstracts in cancer nursing research. Method: Journal articles involving RCTs in cancer nursing research were retrieved from MEDLINE and CINAHL in September 2010. Inclusion criteria were: nursing research, English language, RCT design, and full-text article was available online. Articles were excluded if they were duplicate reports of the same study, or were secondary analysis of RCT data. The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist for reporting RCTs in journal and conference abstracts was used to assess the quality of the abstract. Abstracts were scored as checklist item present in the abstract (adherence to the CONSORT item) or checklist item absent (non-adherence). The Jadad scale (Oxford quality scoring system) was used to assess full length journal articles. Journal impact factor (IF) was used as the measure of journal quality. Results: 114 articles published between 1989 and 2010 were analyzed. This included 48 journals, with IF between .59 and 33.63. The inter-rater agreement Cohen's kappa was .95 overall. Out of 17 items on the CONSORT abstract checklist, 7 items had > 80% adherence (the item was found in more than 80% of abstracts), and 7 items had < 10% adherence, including one, “Trial status”, with 0% adherence. Four items (allocation concealment, blinding, and intent to treat analysis) had adherence rate between 1.8% and 28.1%. Adherence to the CONSORT checklist was significantly associated with both IF (Spearman’s rho=.23, p=.03) and the Jadad score (Spearman’s rho=.30, p=.001). Implications: This study suggests that the quality of reporting RCTs in cancer nursing can be improved. It is recommended that nursing studies adopt standards such as the CONSORT guideline to evaluate and improve reporting quality. The use of the CONSORT guideline may need to be disseminated to nursing researchers.en_GB
dc.subjectCancer nursing researchen_GB
dc.subjectArticles, abstracts, comparisonen_GB
dc.date.available2012-02-20T11:56:06Z-
dc.date.issued2012-02-20T11:56:06Z-
dc.date.accessioned2012-02-20T11:56:06Z-
dc.description.sponsorshipWestern Institute of Nursingen_GB
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.