Quality of reporting in abstracts of randomized controlled trials published in leading journals of periodontology and implant dentistry: a survey

Background: Most readers, reviewers, and editors rely on abstracts to decide whether to assess the full text of an article. A research abstract should, therefore, be as informative as possible. The standard of reporting in abstracts of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in periodontology and implant dentistry has not yet been assessed. The objectives of this review are: 1) to assess the quality of reporting in abstracts of RCTs in periodontology and implant dentistry, and 2) to investigate changes in the quality of reporting by comparing samples from different periods. Methods: The authors searched the PubMed electronic database, independently and in duplicate, for abstracts of RCTs published in seven leading journals of periodontology and implant dentistry from 2005 to 2007 and from 2009 to 2011. The quality of reporting in selected abstracts with reference to the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) for Abstracts checklist published in January 2008 was assessed independently and in duplicate. Cohen κ statistic was used to determine the extent of agreement of the reviewers. Pearson χ(2) test and/or Fisher exact test were used to assess differences in reporting in the two samples. Level of significance was set at P <0.05. Results: Three hundred ninety-two abstracts are included in this review. Three items (intervention, objective, and conclusions) were almost fully reported in both samples. In contrast, other items (randomization, trial registration, and funding) were never reported. There were significant changes in reporting for only two items, trial design and title (items better reported in the pre- and post-CONSORT samples, respectively). Most topics, however, were similarly poorly reported in both samples of abstracts. Conclusions: The quality of reporting in abstracts of RCTs in periodontology and implant dentistry can be improved. Authors should follow the CONSORT for Abstracts guidelines, and journal editors should promote clear rules to improve authors' adherence to these guidelines.     

Assessment of the quality of reporting of randomized clinical trials in paediatric dentistry journals

Introduction.  Reporting of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) should be of high quality to support the conclusions reached by the authors. Poor-quality reporting has been associated with an overestimation in intervention efficacy. Within the field of paediatric dentistry, no study has assessed the quality of reporting.
Objective.  The aim of this study was to assess published RCTs in paediatric dental journals between 1985 and 2006 for: (i) whether quality of reporting allows readers to assess the validity of trials; and (ii) whether quality of reporting has improved since the introduction of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines.
Methods.  Hand search of the main paediatric dentistry journals; inclusion criteria were: the trial was performed on children, and RCT. CONSORT guidelines were made into an operational checklist. Trials published between 1985 and 1997, and between 1998 and 2006 were compared to determine any improvement since the publication of the CONSORT guidelines.
Results.  One hundred and seventy-three of 5635 articles met the inclusion criteria. Reporting quality was poor overall and showed heterogeneity. It had improved slightly since the publication of CONSORT. Few trials were reported adequately.
Conclusion.  The quality of reporting of clinical trials is poor, and often not adequate to allow readers to assess trial validity. Overall quality of reporting has not substantially improved since the publication of CONSORT.     

四种口腔专业期刊十年正畸临床论著循证医学质量评估

目的 对四种口腔专业期刊十年的正畸临床论著进行循证医学质量评估,为国内口腔正畸临床试验设计以及论著写作提供参考.方法 手工检索1999至2008年<中华口腔医学杂志>、<华西口腔医学杂志>、<实用口腔医学杂志>和<口腔正畸学>发表的正畸临床论著,提取分析论著的基本信息,对临床试验的设计进行分类评价,采用临床试验统一报告标准(consolidated standards of reporting trials,CONSORT)建立的临床试验评价标准进行质量评估.结果 共提取494篇正畸临床论著,其中有基金支持的占21.3%(105/494).所有论著中前瞻性试验占26.1%(129/494),随机对照临床试验仅有3.8%(19/494).大多数论著由于方法学部分相关信息缺失,无法进行全面的方法学质量评价.即使是随机对照临床试验,其随机方法、分配方式的隐藏、盲法的采用以及应用基线数据分析等方面也不完善.结论 口腔正畸临床试验应在试验设计及论著写作两方面进一步提高.     

Orthodontic and orthopaedic changes associated with treatment in subjects with Class III malocclusions

The aim of this study was to determine the cephalometric changes in subjects with Class III malocclusions after rapid palatal expansion (RPE) and facemask treatment. The 30 subjects presented with developing Class III malocclusions. The treatment group comprised 15 patients (eight girls and seven boys, mean age 11 years 6 months) who had undergone RPE and facemask therapy. The control group consisted of nine girls and six boys with a mean age of 11 years 8 months. Radiographs were take at the same time intervals for both groups, and the average treatment time was 15 months. A Wilcoxon test was used to determine significant differences before and after treatment, and a Mann-Whitney U-test to analyse differences between the treatment and control groups. In the sagittal plane, significant changes were observed in both groups. In the treatment group, the following dimensions increased significantly: A perpendicular to FHp (P < 0.001), ANS-PNS (P < 0.01), 6 perpendicular to FHp (P < 0.05); in the control group Go-Gn (P < 0.05) increased significantly. In the treatment group, SN/Go-Gn and SN/ANS-PNS had higher values and this finding was significant (P < 0.05). Managing developing Class III malocclusions with RPE and maxillary protraction presents favourable results, such as vertical and sagittal displacement of point A.     

Orthodontic interactions: the relationships between the orthodontic services in England and Wales

The manpower distribution and the amount of treatment undertaken by the three orthodontic treatment providing groups was calculated on a national and regional basis. There was marked regional variation in the distribution of orthodontic manpower. It was found that the total orthodontic treatment rate correlated with the distributions of specialist practitioners and general dental practitioners, but not with that of the salaried services. The manpower distribution of specialist practitioners and Community Orthodontists was also related. These results are discussed in terms of the effect of manpower distribution upon demand for treatment and the amount of treatment provided by the orthodontic services.     

Positive association between conflicts of interest and reporting of positive results in randomized clinical trials in dentistry

BackgroundThe relationship between industry funding and study results has been explored widely in medicine but not in dentistry. The authors aimed to assess the relationship between conflicts of interest (COIs) and study results.MethodsThe authors assessed all randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published between July 2010 and June 2012 in the 10 dental journals with the highest impact factors in dentistry. The authors used three definitions of COI and explored their associations with positive study results.ResultsDepending on the definition of COI, the odds ratio for reporting positive results varied between 2.40 (95 percent confidence interval CI, 1.16–5.13) and 9.19 (95 percent CI, 1.71–170.64). The authors found no association between positive study results and journal of publication or area of practice.ConclusionsRCTs in which authors have some type of COI are more likely to have results that support the intervention being assessed.Practical ImplicationsWhen reviewing the results of RCTs, clinicians need to be aware of the association between reporting positive study results and the type of COI disclosure and be even more careful when critically appraising and applying their results.     

Quality of reporting randomised clinical trials in dental and medical research

OBJECTIVE: To assess 1) the quality of reporting randomised clinical trials in dental (RCT-Ds) and medical research (RCT-Ms), 2) the quality of RCT reports in relation to the journal impact factor, 3) the source of funding, and 4) the quality of RCT-Ds in different areas of dental research. DESIGN RANDOM: samples of 100 RCT-Ds and 100 RCT-Ms published in 1999 were evaluated for quality of reporting under blinded conditions with the Jadad quality assessment scale. In addition, correlation between the quality scores and journal impact factor or source of funding, as well as area of dental research were analysed. RESULTS: The quality of RCT-Ds and RCT-Ms published in 1999 was generally inadequate. The quality was largely equivalent in RCT-Ds and RCT-Ms. There was no correlation between the quality scores and the journal impact factor or the source of funding. Some differences were found in the quality scores between different areas of dental research. CONCLUSIONS: The results from these RCT-Ds and RCT-Ms show that most of them were imperfect in the reporting of methodology and trial conduct. There is a clear need to improve the quality of trial reporting in dental and medical research.     

Alignment efficiency and discomfort of three orthodontic archwire sequences: a randomized clinical trial

Abstract

Aim: To compare the efficiency of orthodontic archwire sequences produced by three manufacturers.

Design: Prospective, randomized clinical trial with three parallel groups.

Setting: Private orthodontic practice in Caloundra, QLD, Australia

Subjects and methods: One hundred and thirty‐two consecutive patients were randomized to one of three archwire sequence groups: (i) 3M Unitek, 0·014?inch Nitinol, 0·017?inch×0·017?inch heat activated Ni–Ti; (ii) GAC international, 0·014?inch Sentalloy, 0·016×0·022?inch Bioforce; and (iii) Ormco corporation, 0·014?inch Damon Copper Ni–Ti, 0·014×0·025?inch Damon Copper Ni–Ti. All patients received 0·018×0·025?inch slot Victory Series^TM brackets.

Outcome measures: Mandibular impressions were taken before the insertion of each archwire. Patients completed discomfort surveys according to a seven‐point Likert Scale at 4?h, 24?h, 3?days and 7?days after the insertion of each archwire. Efficiency was measured by time required to reach the working archwire, mandibular anterior alignment and level of discomfort.

Results: No significant differences were found in the reduction of irregularity between the archwire sequences at any time‐point (T1: P?=?0·12; T2: P?=?0·06; T3: P?=?0·21) or in the time to reach the working archwire (P?=?0·28). No significant differences were found in the overall discomfort scores between the archwire sequences (4?h: P?=?0·30; 24?h: P?=?0·18; 3?days: P?=?0·53; 7?days: P?=?0·47). When the time‐points were analysed individually, the 3M Unitek archwire sequence induced significantly less discomfort than GAC and Ormco archwires 24?h after the insertion of the third archwire (P?=?0·02). This could possibly be attributed to the progression in archwire material and archform.

Conclusions: The archwire sequences were similar in alignment efficiency and overall discomfort. Progression in archwire dimension and archform may contribute to discomfort levels. This study provides clinical justification for three common archwire sequences in 0·018×0·025?inch slot brackets.