Trial registration and adherence to reporting guidelines in cardiovascular journals

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective This study investigated the policies of cardiac and cardiovascular system journals concerning clinical trial registration and guideline adoption to understand how frequently journals use these mechanisms to improve transparency, trial reporting and overall study quality. Methods We selected the top 20 (by impact factor) journals cited in the subcategory Cardiac and Cardiovascular Systems' of the Expanded Science Citation Index of the 2014 Journal Citation Reports to extract journal policies concerning the 17 guidelines we identified. In addition, trial and systematic review registration adherence statements were extracted. 300 randomised controlled trials published in 2016 in the top 20 journals were searched for clinical trial registry numbers and CONSORT diagrams. Results Of the 19 cardiac and cardiovascular system journals included in our analysis, eight journals (42%) did not require or recommend trial or review registration. Seven (37%) did not recommend or require a single guideline within their instructions to authors. Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials guidelines (10/19, 53%) were recommended or required most often. Of the trials surveyed, 122/285 (42.8%) published a CONSORT diagram in their manuscript, while 236/292 (80.8%) published a trial registry number. Discussion Cardiac and cardiovascular system journals infrequently require, recommend or enforce the use of reporting guidelines. Furthermore, too few require or enforce the use of clinical trial registration. Cardiology journal editors should consider guideline adoption due to their potential to limit bias and increase transparency.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)753-759
Number of pages7
JournalHeart
Volume104
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 May 2018

Fingerprint

Guidelines
Cardiovascular System
Clinical Trials
Registries
Journal Impact Factor
Manuscripts
Cardiology
Randomized Controlled Trials

Keywords

  • medical ethics
  • research approaches
  • statistics and study design

Cite this

@article{f9c49ea801f0427f8c8e6e6daf9dbadb,
title = "Trial registration and adherence to reporting guidelines in cardiovascular journals",
abstract = "Objective This study investigated the policies of cardiac and cardiovascular system journals concerning clinical trial registration and guideline adoption to understand how frequently journals use these mechanisms to improve transparency, trial reporting and overall study quality. Methods We selected the top 20 (by impact factor) journals cited in the subcategory Cardiac and Cardiovascular Systems' of the Expanded Science Citation Index of the 2014 Journal Citation Reports to extract journal policies concerning the 17 guidelines we identified. In addition, trial and systematic review registration adherence statements were extracted. 300 randomised controlled trials published in 2016 in the top 20 journals were searched for clinical trial registry numbers and CONSORT diagrams. Results Of the 19 cardiac and cardiovascular system journals included in our analysis, eight journals (42{\%}) did not require or recommend trial or review registration. Seven (37{\%}) did not recommend or require a single guideline within their instructions to authors. Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials guidelines (10/19, 53{\%}) were recommended or required most often. Of the trials surveyed, 122/285 (42.8{\%}) published a CONSORT diagram in their manuscript, while 236/292 (80.8{\%}) published a trial registry number. Discussion Cardiac and cardiovascular system journals infrequently require, recommend or enforce the use of reporting guidelines. Furthermore, too few require or enforce the use of clinical trial registration. Cardiology journal editors should consider guideline adoption due to their potential to limit bias and increase transparency.",
keywords = "medical ethics, research approaches, statistics and study design",
author = "Sims, {Matt Thomas} and Bowers, {Aaron Marc} and Fernan, {Jamie Morgan} and Dormire, {Kody Duane} and James Herrington and Matt Vassar",
year = "2018",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1136/heartjnl-2017-312165",
language = "English",
volume = "104",
pages = "753--759",
journal = "Heart",
issn = "1355-6037",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Trial registration and adherence to reporting guidelines in cardiovascular journals

AU - Sims, Matt Thomas

AU - Bowers, Aaron Marc

AU - Fernan, Jamie Morgan

AU - Dormire, Kody Duane

AU - Herrington, James

AU - Vassar, Matt

PY - 2018/5/1

Y1 - 2018/5/1

N2 - Objective This study investigated the policies of cardiac and cardiovascular system journals concerning clinical trial registration and guideline adoption to understand how frequently journals use these mechanisms to improve transparency, trial reporting and overall study quality. Methods We selected the top 20 (by impact factor) journals cited in the subcategory Cardiac and Cardiovascular Systems' of the Expanded Science Citation Index of the 2014 Journal Citation Reports to extract journal policies concerning the 17 guidelines we identified. In addition, trial and systematic review registration adherence statements were extracted. 300 randomised controlled trials published in 2016 in the top 20 journals were searched for clinical trial registry numbers and CONSORT diagrams. Results Of the 19 cardiac and cardiovascular system journals included in our analysis, eight journals (42%) did not require or recommend trial or review registration. Seven (37%) did not recommend or require a single guideline within their instructions to authors. Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials guidelines (10/19, 53%) were recommended or required most often. Of the trials surveyed, 122/285 (42.8%) published a CONSORT diagram in their manuscript, while 236/292 (80.8%) published a trial registry number. Discussion Cardiac and cardiovascular system journals infrequently require, recommend or enforce the use of reporting guidelines. Furthermore, too few require or enforce the use of clinical trial registration. Cardiology journal editors should consider guideline adoption due to their potential to limit bias and increase transparency.

AB - Objective This study investigated the policies of cardiac and cardiovascular system journals concerning clinical trial registration and guideline adoption to understand how frequently journals use these mechanisms to improve transparency, trial reporting and overall study quality. Methods We selected the top 20 (by impact factor) journals cited in the subcategory Cardiac and Cardiovascular Systems' of the Expanded Science Citation Index of the 2014 Journal Citation Reports to extract journal policies concerning the 17 guidelines we identified. In addition, trial and systematic review registration adherence statements were extracted. 300 randomised controlled trials published in 2016 in the top 20 journals were searched for clinical trial registry numbers and CONSORT diagrams. Results Of the 19 cardiac and cardiovascular system journals included in our analysis, eight journals (42%) did not require or recommend trial or review registration. Seven (37%) did not recommend or require a single guideline within their instructions to authors. Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials guidelines (10/19, 53%) were recommended or required most often. Of the trials surveyed, 122/285 (42.8%) published a CONSORT diagram in their manuscript, while 236/292 (80.8%) published a trial registry number. Discussion Cardiac and cardiovascular system journals infrequently require, recommend or enforce the use of reporting guidelines. Furthermore, too few require or enforce the use of clinical trial registration. Cardiology journal editors should consider guideline adoption due to their potential to limit bias and increase transparency.

KW - medical ethics

KW - research approaches

KW - statistics and study design

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85046465694&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/heartjnl-2017-312165

DO - 10.1136/heartjnl-2017-312165

M3 - Article

C2 - 29092915

AN - SCOPUS:85046465694

VL - 104

SP - 753

EP - 759

JO - Heart

JF - Heart

SN - 1355-6037

IS - 9

ER -