liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Quality of reporting randomised clinical trials in dental and medical research
Department of Health Sciences, Knstianstad University, Kristiadstad, Sweden.
Department of Health Sciences, Knstianstad University, Kristiadstad, Sweden.
2002 (English)In: British Dental Journal, ISSN 0007-0610, E-ISSN 1476-5373, Vol. 192, no 2, 100-103 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Objective To assess 1) the quality of reporting randomised clinical trials in dental (RCT-Ds) and medical research (RCT-Ms), 2) the quality of RCT reports in relation to the journal impact factor, 3) the source of funding, and 4) the quality of RCT-Ds in different areas of dental research.

Design Random samples of 100 RCT-Ds and 100 RCT-Ms published in 1999 were evaluated for quality of reporting under blinded conditions with the Jadad quality assessment scale. In addition, correlation between the quality scores and journal impact factor or source of funding, as well as area of dental research were analysed.

Results The quality of RCT-Ds and RCT-Ms published in 1999 was generally inadequate. The quality was largely equivalent in RCT-Ds and RCT-Ms. There was no correlation between the quality scores and the journal impact factor or the source of funding. Some differences were found in the quality scores between different areas of dental research.

Conclusions The results from these RCT-Ds and RCT-Ms show that most of them were imperfect in the reporting of methodology and trial conduct. There is a clear need to improve the quality of trial reporting in dental and medical research.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2002. Vol. 192, no 2, 100-103 p.
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-84950DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4801304OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-84950DiVA: diva2:563129
Available from: 2012-10-29 Created: 2012-10-29 Last updated: 2017-12-07
In thesis
1. Randomised clinical trials and evidence-based general dentistry
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Randomised clinical trials and evidence-based general dentistry
2004 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

A growing number of scientific publications and new treatment modalities have increased the difficulties of keeping up to date with the latest research evidence in clinical practice. Therefore, evidence-based dentistry and medicine (EBDM) has evolved as an attempt to summarise current best evidence.

The overall aim of this thesis was to study the availability and the methodological quality of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in dental (RCT-Ds) and medical (RCT-Ms) research, and publications describing epidemiological registration methods of dental caries. It also examines the applicability of evidence-based methods to general dental practice.

The most important findings were that the armual number of publications in dental research showed a decreasing trend from 1969 to 1999, whereas medical research increased. The armual number of clinical trials (CTs), meta-analyses and RCTs increased, but represented just a fraction of all publications in both dental and medical research. Medical subject heading (MeSH) searches provided an overall adequate method for rapid location of RCT-Ds on Medline for most areas of dental research. The quality of RCT-Ds and RCT-Ms were generally inadequate. There was no correlation between the quality of RCTs and Journal Impact Factor. The armual number of publications, CTs and RCTs in periodontal research (RCT-Ps) increased during 1980-2000. A few clinical research areas dominated the RCT-Ps. Most of the RCT-Ps were published in just two different dental journals. Validation methodology in publications describing epidemiological methods for registering dental caries was inadequate according to EBDM recommendations and needs to be improved.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Linköping: Linköpings universitet, 2004. 57 p.
Series
Linköping University Medical Dissertations, ISSN 0345-0082 ; 865
Keyword
Dental care, dental research, epidemiological methods, evidence-based medicine, Medline, randomized controlled trials, validity
National Category
Social Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-22686 (URN)1978 (Local ID)91-7373-839-5 (ISBN)1978 (Archive number)1978 (OAI)
Public defence
2004-11-12, Aulan, Hälsans Hus, Hälsouniversitetet, Linköping, 13:00 (Swedish)
Opponent
Available from: 2009-10-07 Created: 2009-10-07 Last updated: 2012-10-29Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Authority records BETA

Sjögren, Petteri

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Sjögren, Petteri
In the same journal
British Dental Journal
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 51 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf