Comparison of reports of randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews in surgical journals: literature review.

Full Abstract

OBJECTIVES:
Randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews of such trials are the gold standard for assessing the effectiveness of interventions. There have been concerns about the anecdotal evidence underpinning many of the interventions used and introduced into surgical care. The American College of Surgeons has prioritized the need for more trials and systematic reviews of trials. To investigate the assertion that the methodological quality of studies conducted in surgery is in general poor and to assess the possible impact of new policy developments in the US, we sought to compare the number and proportion of published randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews in the leading two US and UK general surgical journals. Two reviewers systematically and independently hand searched all issues of these journals over a 12-month period to identify randomised controlled trials and systematic reviews.

DESIGN:
Systematic searching and independent abstraction of data from all volumes of the top two general surgical journals published in the USA and the UK in 2004.

SETTING:
519 original reports in UK journals and 616 original reports in USA journals.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:
Number and proportion of randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews.

RESULTS:
Overall, the proportion of randomized controlled trials in all four journals was 5.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.4-7.0) and 5.2% (95% CI 4.1-6.7) for systematic reviews. For journals published in the UK 29/519 (5.6%) of the publications were reports of randomized controlled trials, and for the USA journals this figure was 34/616 (5.5%); odds ratio [OR]=0.99, 95%CI 0.6-1.6; P=0.96. Systematic reviews were significantly more commonly reported in the UK journals:
UK 37/519 (7.1%) versus USA 22/616 (3.6%); OR=0.48, 95%CI 0.3-0.8; P<0.01.

CONCLUSIONS:
The concerns expressed almost a decade ago remain valid:
there are still very few reports of randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews published in leading USA and UK surgical journals, with relatively little difference between these countries in the proportion of reported studies employing these designs. The American College of Surgeons initiative has yet to make an impact.

Learn Faster Today Improve your study skills

Author information

Author/s: Panesar, Sukhmeet Singh (SS); Thakrar, Ricky (R); Athanasiou, Thanos (T); Sheikh, Aziz (A);

Affiliation: Department of Surgical Oncology & Technology, Imperial College London, UK.

Journal and publication information

Publication Type: Comparative Study; Journal Article; Review

Journal: Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine (J R Soc Med), published in England. (Language: eng)

Reference: 2006-Sep; vol 99 (issue 9) : pp 470-2

Dates: Created 2006/09/01; Completed 2006/10/16; Revised 2008/11/20;

PMID: 16946391, status: MEDLINE (last retrieval date: 12/26/2008)

Sourced from the National Library of Medicine. Abstract text and other information may be subject to copyright.

Comments and Corrections

CommentIn: J R Soc Med. 2006 Sep;99(9):429. (PMID: 16946374)

External Links for this article (including full text providers, if available):

Click Electronic Full-text Provider Links to see options for finding the electronic full text links to this article. Note there may be a subscription or fee required for access to the full text. See our FAQ for information on finding FREE full text articles.

This article may also be located in paper journal collections available in many libraries. Use the Journal and Publication Information above to find the full article.

MeSH headings (categories)

This article was linked to the MESH Headings shown below.

Biomedical Research
England
Evidence-Based Medicine - statistics & numerical data
Humans
Meta-Analysis as Topic

Meta-Analysis as Topic
Periodicals as Topic
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - statistics & numerical data
Review Literature as Topic
United States

These are the highest related articles currently in the database:

The ethos and ethics of translational research. 28 Feb 2008
Clinical research: protection of the "vulnerable"? 2 Mar 2008
T2 clinical research: judgment day. 28 Feb 2008
Animal studies in the development of medical countermeasures. 3 Mar 2008
The crisis in scholarly publishing: open access to the rescue? 28 Feb 2008
Point: evidence-based medicine has a sound scientific base. 29 Apr 2008
Cell-based interventions for neurologic conditions: ethical challenges for early human trials. 5 May 2008
Immune-Mediated Diseases II Congress: summary. 30 Mar 2008
Selling translational research: is science a value-neutral autonomous enterprise? 28 Feb 2008
Expedited industry-sponsored translational research: a seductive but hazardous cocktail? 28 Feb 2008

See 100+ related articles.