In a nutshell
Randomised controlled trial in collaboration with BMJ Open, a general medical journal, to evaluate in a real editorial context whether assessing during peer review the consistency between the submitted CONSORT checklist and the information reported in the manuscripts of randomised trials, as well as providing feedback to authors on the inconsistencies found, improves the completeness of reporting of published trials.
Type of project
David Blanco's PhD project under supervision of Erik Cobo at Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya and Jamie Kirkham at Liverpool University and in collaboration with BMJ Open.
Goals and intentions
Randomised trials are considered the gold standard in medical research. The CONSORT Statement aims to improve the quality of reporting of randomised trials. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability of trial findings, therefore these findings cannot inform clinical practice. Different stakeholders, including biomedical journals, have taken different actions to try to improve author adherence to CONSORT. The most popular one is to instruct authors to submit a completed CONSORT checklist with page numbers indicating where the CONSORT items are addressed when they submit their manuscript. However, this measure alone has proven not to be effective. In this study, we intend to assess whether evaluating the checklists submitted by authors and providing feedback to them as part of the peer review process improves the completeness of reporting of published trials.
Functions of the project
What is reviewed