Analysis Of Reporting Quality Research Articles

Reporting Quality Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials in Journal of Neurosurgical Anesthesiology: A Methodological Assessment.

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are considered to provide high levels of evidence to optimize decision-making for patient care, although there can be a risk bias in their design, conduct, and analysis. Quality assessment of RCTs is necessary to assess whether they provide reliable results with little bias. We assessed the reporting quality of RCTs published in the Journal of Neurosurgical Anesthesiology (JNA) between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2017 using the Jadad scale, van Tulder scale, and Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool (CCRBT). We identified 130 RCTs and 570 original articles. Among the 130 RCTs, 92 (70.8%) presented an appropriate blinding method, and 70 (53.8%) described an appropriate allocation method. For the entire period, the percentages of high-quality reporting articles were 71.5%, 73.1%, and 13.8% in the Jadad scale, van Tulder scale, and CCRBT assessments, respectively. There was an improvement in the van Tulder scale over time (coefficients [95% confidence interval {CI}]=0.08 [0.01-0.15]; P=0.02). Appropriate reporting of allocation in the Jadad scale (coefficients [95% CI]=1.68 [1.28-2.07]; P<0.001) and van Tulder scale (coefficients [95% CI]=2.34 [1.97-2.70]; P<0.001), and reporting of blinding in the Jadad (coefficients [95% CI]=1.09 [0.66-1.52]; P<0.001) and van Tulder scores (coefficients [95% CI]=1.85 [1.45-2.25]; P<0.001), were associated with high-quality reporting. The ratio of high-quality reporting RCTs in JNA was consistently high compared with other journals. Thorough consideration of allocation concealment during the peer review process can further improve the reporting quality of RCTs in JNA.

Quality assessment of cryopreserved biospecimens reveals presence of intact biomolecules.

Recapitulation of tumor features in isolated biomolecules is preeminently dependent on obtaining reliable quality biospecimen. Moreover, quality assessment of biobanked specimens at regular intervals is an essential intervention for carrying out effective translational and clinical research. In the current study, genomic DNA was extracted from 140 fresh frozen tissues of oral, breast and colorectal specimens cryopreserved over a period of 3 to 8 months (short term) and 3 to 4 years (long term). Quantification of genomic DNA by absorption and fluorescence spectroscopy confirmed high concentration while qualitative analysis by gel electrophoresis showed intact bands for 94% and 87% of short- and long-term cohorts, respectively. PC-LDA based classification of Raman spectra showed overlapping groups of both cohorts suggesting the quality of DNA being preserved irrespective of storage period. To the best of our knowledge this is the first Indian biobank study reporting quality analysis of biospecimens cryopreserved at different time periods.

Quantity and Reporting Quality of Kidney Research.

In 2004, researchers reported that the number of nephrology clinical trials was low and that the reporting quality of such trials was suboptimal. Furthermore, the number or quality of preclinical kidney-related studies has not been systematically evaluated. We performed a systematic review of randomized clinical trials published in 1966-2017 (listed in the Cochrane Library) and preclinical studies published in 1945-2017 (listed in PubMed). For reporting quality analysis, we evaluated the final main paper of 118 clinical trial reports and 135 preclinical studies published in leading journals in 1996, 2006, and 2016 on the basis of criteria from the widely used CONSORT and ARRIVE guidelines. The annual number of reports of clinical kidney-related trials more than doubled between 2004 and 2014 along with reports in other medical disciplines. Hypertension remains the dominant focus of study, but ongoing trials also center on CKD, ESRD, and AKI. The reporting quality analysis revealed improvements, but deficits in reporting of clinical trial design, mode of randomization, and intention-to-treat analysis remain. Annual numbers of kidney-related preclinical studies remained low between 1945 and 2017 compared with other disciplines. Reporting quality analysis of preclinical studies revealed substantial reporting deficits across all leading journals, with little improvement over the last 20 years, especially for group size calculations, defining primary versus secondary outcomes, and blinded analysis. Nephrology studies keep increasing in number but still lag behind other medical disciplines, and the quality of data reporting in kidney research can be further improved.