{"title":"发表在伊朗和顶级护理和助产期刊上的随机对照试验（RCT）文章的方法学报告质量：一项横断面研究，使用CONSORT检查表将Scopus数据库编入索引。","authors":"Razieh Bagherzadeh, Siavash Asadzadeh Jahanabad, Leila Dehghani","doi":"10.2174/0115748871331785250415055616","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The quality of methodological reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is an important consideration in the use of RCTs for guiding healthcare decisions; however, in recent years, the quality of reporting has been examined from a more methodological perspective. The current study seeks to compare the methodological reporting of randomized controlled trial (RCT) articles published in Iranian nursing and midwifery journals indexed in Scopus with that of RCT articles published in nursing and midwifery journals indexed in the Scopus database, utilizing the CONSORT checklist as a framework for evaluation.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The current study is a comparative cross-sectional study. RCT articles from eight Iranian Scopus-indexed journals (381 articles) and three of the journals with the highest CiteScore index (204 articles) were reviewed. The study was conducted during 2017-2021. The data collection utilized the methodology section of the CONSORT checklist, which comprises 17 items and incorporates a two-dimensional scoring system with a score range of 0 to 17. SPSS 19 software was used for data analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The average percentages of the methodological reports published in the top three Iranian journals, indexed in the Scopus, were 76.4% and 84.4%, respectively. Also, the mean quality score of methodological reporting of RCT articles published in Iranian nursing and midwifery journals was significantly lower than the mean score of methodological reporting of RCT articles in international nursing and midwifery journals indexed in the Scopus published from 2017-2021 (P <0.001). In some cases, such as items related to randomisation and blinding, there was under-reporting in both groups of journals.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results of the research showed that the average quality of the methodological report in most cases of CONSORT statements in Iranian journals is lower than that of the top three Scopus journals. Journals with lower reporting quality scores, such as Iranian journals, can improve the quality of their articles by following reporting guidelines for all types of articles, including RCT articles.</p>","PeriodicalId":21174,"journal":{"name":"Reviews on recent clinical trials","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Quality of Methodological Reporting of Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) Articles Published in Iranian and Top Nursing and Midwifery Journals Indexed in the Scopus Database using the CONSORT Checklist: A Cross-sectional Study.\",\"authors\":\"Razieh Bagherzadeh, Siavash Asadzadeh Jahanabad, Leila Dehghani\",\"doi\":\"10.2174/0115748871331785250415055616\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The quality of methodological reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is an important consideration in the use of RCTs for guiding healthcare decisions; however, in recent years, the quality of reporting has been examined from a more methodological perspective. The current study seeks to compare the methodological reporting of randomized controlled trial (RCT) articles published in Iranian nursing and midwifery journals indexed in Scopus with that of RCT articles published in nursing and midwifery journals indexed in the Scopus database, utilizing the CONSORT checklist as a framework for evaluation.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The current study is a comparative cross-sectional study. RCT articles from eight Iranian Scopus-indexed journals (381 articles) and three of the journals with the highest CiteScore index (204 articles) were reviewed. The study was conducted during 2017-2021. The data collection utilized the methodology section of the CONSORT checklist, which comprises 17 items and incorporates a two-dimensional scoring system with a score range of 0 to 17. SPSS 19 software was used for data analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The average percentages of the methodological reports published in the top three Iranian journals, indexed in the Scopus, were 76.4% and 84.4%, respectively. Also, the mean quality score of methodological reporting of RCT articles published in Iranian nursing and midwifery journals was significantly lower than the mean score of methodological reporting of RCT articles in international nursing and midwifery journals indexed in the Scopus published from 2017-2021 (P <0.001). In some cases, such as items related to randomisation and blinding, there was under-reporting in both groups of journals.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results of the research showed that the average quality of the methodological report in most cases of CONSORT statements in Iranian journals is lower than that of the top three Scopus journals. Journals with lower reporting quality scores, such as Iranian journals, can improve the quality of their articles by following reporting guidelines for all types of articles, including RCT articles.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21174,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Reviews on recent clinical trials\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Reviews on recent clinical trials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2174/0115748871331785250415055616\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reviews on recent clinical trials","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/0115748871331785250415055616","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Quality of Methodological Reporting of Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) Articles Published in Iranian and Top Nursing and Midwifery Journals Indexed in the Scopus Database using the CONSORT Checklist: A Cross-sectional Study.
Background: The quality of methodological reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is an important consideration in the use of RCTs for guiding healthcare decisions; however, in recent years, the quality of reporting has been examined from a more methodological perspective. The current study seeks to compare the methodological reporting of randomized controlled trial (RCT) articles published in Iranian nursing and midwifery journals indexed in Scopus with that of RCT articles published in nursing and midwifery journals indexed in the Scopus database, utilizing the CONSORT checklist as a framework for evaluation.
Method: The current study is a comparative cross-sectional study. RCT articles from eight Iranian Scopus-indexed journals (381 articles) and three of the journals with the highest CiteScore index (204 articles) were reviewed. The study was conducted during 2017-2021. The data collection utilized the methodology section of the CONSORT checklist, which comprises 17 items and incorporates a two-dimensional scoring system with a score range of 0 to 17. SPSS 19 software was used for data analysis.
Results: The average percentages of the methodological reports published in the top three Iranian journals, indexed in the Scopus, were 76.4% and 84.4%, respectively. Also, the mean quality score of methodological reporting of RCT articles published in Iranian nursing and midwifery journals was significantly lower than the mean score of methodological reporting of RCT articles in international nursing and midwifery journals indexed in the Scopus published from 2017-2021 (P <0.001). In some cases, such as items related to randomisation and blinding, there was under-reporting in both groups of journals.
Conclusion: The results of the research showed that the average quality of the methodological report in most cases of CONSORT statements in Iranian journals is lower than that of the top three Scopus journals. Journals with lower reporting quality scores, such as Iranian journals, can improve the quality of their articles by following reporting guidelines for all types of articles, including RCT articles.
期刊介绍：
Reviews on Recent Clinical Trials publishes frontier reviews on recent clinical trials of major importance. The journal"s aim is to publish the highest quality review articles in the field. Topics covered include: important Phase I – IV clinical trial studies, clinical investigations at all stages of development and therapeutics. The journal is essential reading for all researchers and clinicians involved in drug therapy and clinical trials.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
