Abstract

Reporting of several important aspects of trial methods improved between 2000 and 2006; however, the quality of reporting remains well below an acceptable level. Without complete and transparent reporting of how a trial was designed and conducted, it is difficult for readers to assess its conduct and validity.

Keywords

MedicineConsolidated Standards of Reporting TrialsConfidence intervalSample size determinationRelative riskClinical trialInternal medicineStatisticsMathematics

Affiliated Institutions

Related Publications

Publication Info

Year
2010
Type
article
Volume
340
Issue
mar23 1
Pages
c723-c723
Citations
504
Access
Closed

External Links

Social Impact

Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions

Citation Metrics

504
OpenAlex

Cite This

Sally Hopewell, Susan Dutton, Ly‐Mee Yu et al. (2010). The quality of reports of randomised trials in 2000 and 2006: comparative study of articles indexed in PubMed. BMJ , 340 (mar23 1) , c723-c723. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c723

Identifiers

DOI
10.1136/bmj.c723