UCL Discovery
UCL home » Library Services » Electronic resources » UCL Discovery

Has the quality of reporting in Periodontology changed in 14 years? A systematic review

Leow, N; Hussain, Z; Petrie, A; Donos, N; Needleman, I; (2016) Has the quality of reporting in Periodontology changed in 14 years? A systematic review. Journal of Clinical Periodontology , 43 (10) pp. 833-838. 10.1111/jcpe.12572. Green open access

[thumbnail of Article]
Preview
Text (Article)
Needleman_Quality of RCTs in Perio JCP Rev1 25Mar16.final.pdf

Download (379kB) | Preview
[thumbnail of Figure 1]
Preview
Text (Figure 1)
Needleman_Figure 1 25Mar16.pdf

Download (6kB) | Preview
[thumbnail of Table S1]
Preview
Text (Table S1)
Needleman_Table S1 CONSORT NPE.pdf

Download (12kB) | Preview
[thumbnail of Table S2]
Preview
Text (Table S2)
Needleman_Table S2 Included Articles 25Mar16.pdf

Download (387kB) | Preview
[thumbnail of Table S3]
Preview
Text (Table S3)
Needleman_Table S3 Excluded 25Mar16.pdf

Download (241kB) | Preview

Abstract

Quality of reporting randomised controlled trials in periodontology has been poor. Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines and an extension for non-pharmacologic trials (CONSORT–NPE), were introduced to aid in improving this. Aims: Assess the quality of reporting in periodontology, changes over the last 14 years, and adherence to CONSORT–NPE. Methods: RCTs in humans, published in three periodontal journals, from 2013-2015 were included. Search was conducted through Medline, Embase and hand searching. Results: 173 full text articles included. Two reviewers screened for reporting quality (kappa=0.69, 95%CI 0.60-0.76). 84% of studies (n=145) described randomisation methods, 74% (n=128) highlighted examiner blinding, and 87% (n=151) accounted for patients at study conclusion. Patient and caregiver blinding was addressed in 50% (n=70) and 50% (n=27) of studies, respectively. 64% (n=110) described adequate allocation concealment. Compared with Montenegro et al. 2002, improvements seen in describing randomisation (2002,16.5%; 2016,84%), allocation concealment (2002,6.5%; 2016,64%), caregiver masking (2002,17%; 2015,50%). CONSORT-NPE; 62% (n=107) had detailed explanations of all treatments, 88% (n=152) lacked protocols for adherence of caregivers’ to an intervention. Only 17% (n=29) described caregivers’ expertise and case volume. Conclusions: Substantial improvements have occurred. Attention is required for statistical analysis of patient losses and masking. CONSORT-NPE aspects were poorly reported.

Type: Article
Title: Has the quality of reporting in Periodontology changed in 14 years? A systematic review
Open access status: An open access version is available from UCL Discovery
DOI: 10.1111/jcpe.12572
Publisher version: http://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12572
Language: English
Keywords: Research Design, Clinical Trials, RCTs, Random Allocation, Bias
UCL classification: UCL
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Medical Sciences
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Medical Sciences > Eastman Dental Institute
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Medical Sciences > Eastman Dental Institute > Restorative Dental Sciences
URI: https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1485866
Downloads since deposit
513Downloads
Download activity - last month
Download activity - last 12 months
Downloads by country - last 12 months

Archive Staff Only

View Item View Item