CONSORT 2025 statement: Updated guideline for reporting randomised trials.

IF 15.8 1区 医学 Q1 Medicine
PLoS Medicine Pub Date : 2025-04-14 eCollection Date: 2025-04-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pmed.1004587
Sally Hopewell, An-Wen Chan, Gary S Collins, Asbjørn Hróbjartsson, David Moher, Kenneth F Schulz, Ruth Tunn, Rakesh Aggarwal, Michael Berkwits, Jesse A Berlin, Nita Bhandari, Nancy J Butcher, Marion K Campbell, Runcie C W Chidebe, Diana Elbourne, Andrew Farmer, Dean A Fergusson, Robert M Golub, Steven N Goodman, Tammy C Hoffmann, John P A Ioannidis, Brennan C Kahan, Rachel L Knowles, Sarah E Lamb, Steff Lewis, Elizabeth Loder, Martin Offringa, Philippe Ravaud, Dawn P Richards, Frank W Rockhold, David L Schriger, Nandi L Siegried, Sophie Staniszewska, Rod S Taylor, Lehana Thabane, David Torgerson, Sunita Vohra, Ian R White, Isabelle Boutron
{"title":"CONSORT 2025 statement: Updated guideline for reporting randomised trials.","authors":"Sally Hopewell, An-Wen Chan, Gary S Collins, Asbjørn Hróbjartsson, David Moher, Kenneth F Schulz, Ruth Tunn, Rakesh Aggarwal, Michael Berkwits, Jesse A Berlin, Nita Bhandari, Nancy J Butcher, Marion K Campbell, Runcie C W Chidebe, Diana Elbourne, Andrew Farmer, Dean A Fergusson, Robert M Golub, Steven N Goodman, Tammy C Hoffmann, John P A Ioannidis, Brennan C Kahan, Rachel L Knowles, Sarah E Lamb, Steff Lewis, Elizabeth Loder, Martin Offringa, Philippe Ravaud, Dawn P Richards, Frank W Rockhold, David L Schriger, Nandi L Siegried, Sophie Staniszewska, Rod S Taylor, Lehana Thabane, David Torgerson, Sunita Vohra, Ian R White, Isabelle Boutron","doi":"10.1371/journal.pmed.1004587","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Well designed and properly executed randomised trials are considered the most reliable evidence on the benefits of healthcare interventions. However, there is overwhelming evidence that the quality of reporting is not optimal. The CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement was designed to improve the quality of reporting and provides a minimum set of items to be included in a report of a randomised trial. CONSORT was first published in 1996, then updated in 2001 and 2010. Here, we present the updated CONSORT 2025 statement, which aims to account for recent methodological advancements and feedback from end users.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a scoping review of the literature and developed a project-specific database of empirical and theoretical evidence related to CONSORT, to generate a list of potential changes to the checklist. The list was enriched with recommendations provided by the lead authors of existing CONSORT extensions (Harms, Outcomes, Non-pharmacological Treatment), other related reporting guidelines (TIDieR) and recommendations from other sources (e.g., personal communications). The list of potential changes to the checklist was assessed in a large, international, online, three-round Delphi survey involving 317 participants and discussed at a two-day online expert consensus meeting of 30 invited international experts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We have made substantive changes to the CONSORT checklist. We added seven new checklist items, revised three items, deleted one item, and integrated several items from key CONSORT extensions. We also restructured the CONSORT checklist, with a new section on open science. The CONSORT 2025 statement consists of a 30-item checklist of essential items that should be included when reporting the results of a randomised trial and a diagram for documenting the flow of participants through the trial. To facilitate implementation of CONSORT 2025, we have also developed an expanded version of the CONSORT 2025 checklist, with bullet points eliciting critical elements of each item.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Authors, editors, reviewers, and other potential users should use CONSORT 2025 when writing and evaluating manuscripts of randomised trials to ensure that trial reports are clear and transparent.</p>","PeriodicalId":49008,"journal":{"name":"PLoS Medicine","volume":"22 4","pages":"e1004587"},"PeriodicalIF":15.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11996237/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004587","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Well designed and properly executed randomised trials are considered the most reliable evidence on the benefits of healthcare interventions. However, there is overwhelming evidence that the quality of reporting is not optimal. The CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement was designed to improve the quality of reporting and provides a minimum set of items to be included in a report of a randomised trial. CONSORT was first published in 1996, then updated in 2001 and 2010. Here, we present the updated CONSORT 2025 statement, which aims to account for recent methodological advancements and feedback from end users.

Methods: We conducted a scoping review of the literature and developed a project-specific database of empirical and theoretical evidence related to CONSORT, to generate a list of potential changes to the checklist. The list was enriched with recommendations provided by the lead authors of existing CONSORT extensions (Harms, Outcomes, Non-pharmacological Treatment), other related reporting guidelines (TIDieR) and recommendations from other sources (e.g., personal communications). The list of potential changes to the checklist was assessed in a large, international, online, three-round Delphi survey involving 317 participants and discussed at a two-day online expert consensus meeting of 30 invited international experts.

Results: We have made substantive changes to the CONSORT checklist. We added seven new checklist items, revised three items, deleted one item, and integrated several items from key CONSORT extensions. We also restructured the CONSORT checklist, with a new section on open science. The CONSORT 2025 statement consists of a 30-item checklist of essential items that should be included when reporting the results of a randomised trial and a diagram for documenting the flow of participants through the trial. To facilitate implementation of CONSORT 2025, we have also developed an expanded version of the CONSORT 2025 checklist, with bullet points eliciting critical elements of each item.

Conclusions: Authors, editors, reviewers, and other potential users should use CONSORT 2025 when writing and evaluating manuscripts of randomised trials to ensure that trial reports are clear and transparent.

CONSORT 2025声明:更新的随机试验报告指南。
背景:精心设计和正确执行的随机试验被认为是医疗保健干预益处的最可靠证据。然而,有大量证据表明,报告的质量并非最佳。CONSORT(试验综合报告标准)声明旨在提高报告质量,并提供随机试验报告中包含的最低项目集。CONSORT于1996年首次出版,随后于2001年和2010年更新。在这里,我们提出了更新的CONSORT 2025声明,旨在说明最近的方法进步和最终用户的反馈。方法:我们对文献进行了范围审查,并开发了一个与CONSORT相关的经验和理论证据的项目特定数据库,以生成清单的潜在变更列表。现有CONSORT扩展(危害、结果、非药物治疗)的主要作者、其他相关报告指南(TIDieR)和其他来源(如个人通信)的建议丰富了该清单。清单的潜在变化清单是在一个大型的、国际性的、在线的、涉及317名参与者的三轮德尔菲调查中评估的,并在30名受邀国际专家为期两天的在线专家共识会议上进行了讨论。结果:我们对CONSORT检查表进行了实质性的修改。我们增加了7个新的清单项目,修改了3个项目,删除了1个项目,并从关键的CONSORT扩展中集成了几个项目。我们还重新构建了CONSORT清单,增加了一个关于开放科学的新部分。CONSORT 2025声明包括一份30项的基本项目清单,在报告随机试验结果时应包括这些项目,以及一份记录试验参与者流程的图表。为了促进CONSORT 2025的实施,我们还开发了CONSORT 2025清单的扩展版本,其中列出了每个项目的关键要素。结论:作者、编辑、审稿人和其他潜在用户在撰写和评估随机试验手稿时应使用CONSORT 2025,以确保试验报告清晰透明。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
PLoS Medicine
PLoS Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
17.60
自引率
0.60%
发文量
227
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: PLOS Medicine is a prominent platform for discussing and researching global health challenges. The journal covers a wide range of topics, including biomedical, environmental, social, and political factors affecting health. It prioritizes articles that contribute to clinical practice, health policy, or a better understanding of pathophysiology, ultimately aiming to improve health outcomes across different settings. The journal is unwavering in its commitment to uphold the highest ethical standards in medical publishing. This includes actively managing and disclosing any conflicts of interest related to reporting, reviewing, and publishing. PLOS Medicine promotes transparency in the entire review and publication process. The journal also encourages data sharing and encourages the reuse of published work. Additionally, authors retain copyright for their work, and the publication is made accessible through Open Access with no restrictions on availability and dissemination. PLOS Medicine takes measures to avoid conflicts of interest associated with advertising drugs and medical devices or engaging in the exclusive sale of reprints.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信