Reporting quality of abstracts of randomized controlled trials related to implant dentistry

Menne, Max Clemens; Nikolaos, Pandis; Faggion, Clovis Mariano Junior

Research article (journal) | Peer reviewed

Abstract

Background: The abstract of a scientific article should be accurate and detailed in summarizing the information of the full-text because it is the first article section the reader examines. This study assessed the reporting quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) abstracts related to implant dentistry and examined associations between reporting quality and study characteristics. Methods: On January 17, 2021, we searched the PubMed database for abstracts of RCTs published in high-ranked periodontology and implant dentistry journals from 2016 to 2021. For each abstract, we assessed if the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials for Abstracts (CONSORT-A) checklist items were reported completely, partially, or not reported. An Overall CONSORT Score (OCS) and relative score (OCS%) were calculated as a proxy to checklist adherance. Linear regression models were fitted to analyze associations between trial characteristics and completeness of reporting. Results: Four hundred and thirty-four of the 678 retrieved abstracts were eligible for inclusion. The mean OCS and OCS% were 6.23 (standard deviation [SD] = 1.56) or 41.5% (SD = 10.4), respectively. Items most frequently reported included the title (n = 434; 100%), intended intervention (n = 425; 98%), and conclusions (n = 430; 99%). Participant allocation, masking, and trial registration were rarely completely reported with frequencies of 2%, 3%, and 4%, respectively. We found that number of authors, continent, type of RCT, number of centers, report of ethical approval, funding, structure, and length of the abstract were associated with reporting quality. Conclusion: The reporting quality of abstracts in RCTs related to implant dentistry is suboptimal. Journals should start to incorporate and endorse the use of the CONSORT-A guidelines in their instructions to authors to enhance reporting quality.

Details about the publication

JournalJournal of Periodontology (J Periodontol)
Volume93
Issue5
Page range73-82
StatusPublished
Release year2022
Language in which the publication is writtenEnglish
DOI10.1002/JPER.21-0396
Link to the full texthttps://api.elsevier.com/content/abstract/scopus_id/85126772709
Keywordssystematic reviews; methodological study; methods; meta-analysis; evidence-based dentistry

Authors from the University of Münster

Faggion, Clovis Mariano Junior
Department of Periodontology