Evaluation of Clinical Trial Abstracts of Scientific Journal Using the CONSORT Checklist

The report of the research results should be effectively, quickly and easily accessible to others. The most important type of medical studies in order to answer medical questions is Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT). Therefore, proper design and accurate reporting are particularly important. The aim of this study was to evaluate the published Iranian Journals abstracts using clinical list of CONSORT (taken criteria to report trials) in 2010. Eighty-eight RCT Abstracts Between 2011-2012 from 47 Journals of Iran University of Medical Sciences were evaluated in a descriptive study by two independent assessors through the CONSORT checklist which was included (referring to randomized term in the article title, full mentioning of the corresponding author details, explaining the participants selection criteria and place of data collection criteria, mentioning the applied intervention, determining the specific targets or assumptions, primary outcome expression, referring to the type of blinding, mentioning the number of participants in each group, The conditions of trials and follow-up, analysis of the number of participants in each group in terms of the primary outcome, referring to the preliminary results of the study, significant adverse events and side effects, final applied conclusion, mentioning the registration number of the clinical trial, introducing the source of the funding). Obvious referring to each case is considered as yes and any ambiguity or lack of report is considered as no. the Yes and No cases were rated by one and zero. Also, the percentage of each case was calculated as the sum of pointing Abstracts to it Than 88. A final score was given from the 18 available items in the clinical List of CONSORT abstracts to each article. The ratio of the trials which were reported each cases appropriately; was calculated with the 95% confidence intervals. None of the articles mentioned all of the clinical list items completely. The maximum and minimum of the achieved scores by articles from 18 items of the clinical were, 14(%95 CI 62-100) and 5(95%CI9-60). Thirteen reported trials (14.8%) were at least <50% of the items, fifty-two articles (59.1%) were within 50–60% and twenty-three (26.1%) of them were more than 60%. About a third of cases were reported less than 20% of clinical List which were contained: mentioning the type of trial design in the title (4.5%), mentioning the number of participants in the study analysis (4.5%), recommendations of the important adverse events and side effects (6.8%), the Funding resource (9.1%), mentioning the randomization method (13.6%) and Referring to the random term in the article title (17.1%). The necessity of compelling the criteria at the time of writing and reviewing RCT articles will be promoted according to the results of this research. Therefore, the emphasis of the journals to the authors and reviewers based on the compliance of these criteria in reporting trials is imperative.