呼吁提高内部有效性和报告手工治疗试验标榜为实用主义：方法学回顾

IF 1.1 4区医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL

International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine Pub Date : 2025-02-08 DOI:10.1016/j.ijosm.2025.100754

S. Roura , G. Alvarez , D. Hohenschurz-Schmidt , I. Solà , R. Núñez-Cortés , J. Bracchiglione , C. Fernández-Jané , J. Phalip , I. Gich , M. Sitjà-Rabert , G. Urrútia

{"title":"呼吁提高内部有效性和报告手工治疗试验标榜为实用主义：方法学回顾","authors":"S. Roura , G. Alvarez , D. Hohenschurz-Schmidt , I. Solà , R. Núñez-Cortés , J. Bracchiglione , C. Fernández-Jané , J. Phalip , I. Gich , M. Sitjà-Rabert , G. Urrútia","doi":"10.1016/j.ijosm.2025.100754","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>This study provides further data from a review assessing methodological characteristics of pragmatic randomised controlled trials (pRCTs) published in manual therapy (MT). In this second part, we aim to assess the report, the risk of bias (RoB), and the relationship between these items and the pragmatism scores of the self-labelled pRCTs in the MT field.</div></div><div><h3>Study design and setting</h3><div>We searched MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for pRCTs in the MT field from inception to January 2024. Two independent reviewers screened the trials using several CONSORT extensions and assessed them using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. We performed a descriptive analysis using frequencies and percentages and a relation analysis between the trials' pragmatism, their reporting, and their RoB.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We included 39 self-labelled MT pRCTs. Compliance with CONSORT items was higher than 70 % in one-third of the included trials (13/39) but varied across items. Performance and detection bias were the main threats to internal validity (we rated 90 %, 35/39, and 77 %; 30/39 of trials at high risk of bias, respectively). Selective reporting bias was unclear in almost half of the sample (46 %; 18/39). No relation was found between the highly pragmatic attitude and good reporting except for CONSORT item 25 (Sources of funding and other support) (p = 0.006). No relation was found between the RoB and the pragmatic attitude of the studies. The percentage of compliance with CONSORT items was higher in the trials with low RoB.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Pragmatic trials in MT have significant methodological limitations, and their reporting is suboptimal. Nonetheless, trials with less risk of bias had higher compliance with CONSORT items.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51068,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine","volume":"55 ","pages":"Article 100754"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A call for improving the internal validity and the reporting of manual therapy trials self-labelled as pragmatic: A methodological review\",\"authors\":\"S. Roura , G. Alvarez , D. Hohenschurz-Schmidt , I. Solà , R. Núñez-Cortés , J. Bracchiglione , C. Fernández-Jané , J. Phalip , I. Gich , M. Sitjà-Rabert , G. Urrútia\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijosm.2025.100754\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>This study provides further data from a review assessing methodological characteristics of pragmatic randomised controlled trials (pRCTs) published in manual therapy (MT). In this second part, we aim to assess the report, the risk of bias (RoB), and the relationship between these items and the pragmatism scores of the self-labelled pRCTs in the MT field.</div></div><div><h3>Study design and setting</h3><div>We searched MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for pRCTs in the MT field from inception to January 2024. Two independent reviewers screened the trials using several CONSORT extensions and assessed them using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. We performed a descriptive analysis using frequencies and percentages and a relation analysis between the trials' pragmatism, their reporting, and their RoB.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We included 39 self-labelled MT pRCTs. Compliance with CONSORT items was higher than 70 % in one-third of the included trials (13/39) but varied across items. Performance and detection bias were the main threats to internal validity (we rated 90 %, 35/39, and 77 %; 30/39 of trials at high risk of bias, respectively). Selective reporting bias was unclear in almost half of the sample (46 %; 18/39). No relation was found between the highly pragmatic attitude and good reporting except for CONSORT item 25 (Sources of funding and other support) (p = 0.006). No relation was found between the RoB and the pragmatic attitude of the studies. The percentage of compliance with CONSORT items was higher in the trials with low RoB.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Pragmatic trials in MT have significant methodological limitations, and their reporting is suboptimal. Nonetheless, trials with less risk of bias had higher compliance with CONSORT items.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51068,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine\",\"volume\":\"55 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100754\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1746068925000100\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1746068925000100","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

目的：本研究通过对发表在《手工疗法》（MT）杂志上的实用随机对照试验（prct）的方法学特征进行评估，提供了进一步的数据。在第二部分中，我们的目标是评估报告，偏倚风险（RoB），以及这些项目与MT领域自标记prct的实用主义分数之间的关系。研究设计和设置我们检索了MEDLINE和Cochrane中央对照试验注册库，从开始到2024年1月，检索了MT领域的prct。两名独立审稿人使用几种CONSORT扩展筛选试验，并使用Cochrane偏倚风险工具进行评估。我们使用频率和百分比进行了描述性分析，并分析了试验的实用主义、报告和RoB之间的关系。结果纳入39例自标记MT prct。在三分之一的纳入试验（13/39）中，CONSORT项目的依从性高于70%，但不同项目的依从性不同。绩效和检测偏差是内部效度的主要威胁(我们的评分为90%，35/39和77%；分别为30/39的高偏倚风险试验)。几乎一半的样本(46%；18/39)。除了CONSORT项目25（资金来源和其他支持）外，高度务实的态度与良好的报告之间没有关系（p = 0.006）。在研究中，RoB与语用态度之间没有关系。在低RoB的试验中，CONSORT项目的依从性百分比较高。结论：MT的实用试验在方法学上存在明显的局限性，其报告不够理想。尽管如此，偏倚风险较低的试验对CONSORT项目的依从性较高。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

A call for improving the internal validity and the reporting of manual therapy trials self-labelled as pragmatic: A methodological review

Objectives

This study provides further data from a review assessing methodological characteristics of pragmatic randomised controlled trials (pRCTs) published in manual therapy (MT). In this second part, we aim to assess the report, the risk of bias (RoB), and the relationship between these items and the pragmatism scores of the self-labelled pRCTs in the MT field.

Study design and setting

We searched MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for pRCTs in the MT field from inception to January 2024. Two independent reviewers screened the trials using several CONSORT extensions and assessed them using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. We performed a descriptive analysis using frequencies and percentages and a relation analysis between the trials' pragmatism, their reporting, and their RoB.

Results

We included 39 self-labelled MT pRCTs. Compliance with CONSORT items was higher than 70 % in one-third of the included trials (13/39) but varied across items. Performance and detection bias were the main threats to internal validity (we rated 90 %, 35/39, and 77 %; 30/39 of trials at high risk of bias, respectively). Selective reporting bias was unclear in almost half of the sample (46 %; 18/39). No relation was found between the highly pragmatic attitude and good reporting except for CONSORT item 25 (Sources of funding and other support) (p = 0.006). No relation was found between the RoB and the pragmatic attitude of the studies. The percentage of compliance with CONSORT items was higher in the trials with low RoB.

Conclusion

Pragmatic trials in MT have significant methodological limitations, and their reporting is suboptimal. Nonetheless, trials with less risk of bias had higher compliance with CONSORT items.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine 医学-医学：内科

CiteScore

2.20

自引率

36.80%

发文量

审稿时长

3 months

期刊介绍： The International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine is a peer-reviewed journal that provides for the publication of high quality research articles and review papers that are as broad as the many disciplines that influence and underpin the principles and practice of osteopathic medicine. Particular emphasis is given to basic science research, clinical epidemiology and health social science in relation to osteopathy and neuromusculoskeletal medicine. The Editorial Board encourages submission of articles based on both quantitative and qualitative research designs. The Editorial Board also aims to provide a forum for discourse and debate on any aspect of osteopathy and neuromusculoskeletal medicine with the aim of critically evaluating existing practices in regard to the diagnosis, treatment and management of patients with neuromusculoskeletal disorders and somatic dysfunction. All manuscripts submitted to the IJOM are subject to a blinded review process. The categories currently available for publication include reports of original research, review papers, commentaries and articles related to clinical practice, including case reports. Further details can be found in the IJOM Instructions for Authors. Manuscripts are accepted for publication with the understanding that no substantial part has been, or will be published elsewhere.