Quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials in chiropractic using the CONSORT checklist

摘要: Reviews indicate that the quality of reporting randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in medical literature is less than optimal, poor to moderate, and require improving. However, chiropractic RCTs unknown. As a result, aim this study was assess identify factors associated with better quality. We hypothesized influenced by industry funding, positive findings, larger sample sizes, latter year publication non-chiropractic journals. published between 2005 2014 were sourced from clinical trial registers, PubMed Cochrane Reviews. included if they involved high-velocity, low-amplitude (HVLA) spinal and/or extremity manipulation conducted chiropractor or within department. Data extraction, reviews all authors independently. Disagreements resolved consensus. Outcomes: 39-point overall score checklist developed based on CONSORT 2010 for Non-Pharmacological Treatments statements. Four key methodological items, allocation concealment, blinding participants assessors, use intention-to-treat analysis (ITT) also investigated. Thirty-five included. The ranged 10 33 (median 26.0; IQR = 8.00). Allocation assessors ITT reported 31 (87 %), 16 (46 %), 25 (71 %) 21 (60 %) 35 respectively. Items most underreported statement. Multivariate regression analysis, revealed (t32 = 5.17, p = 0.000, 95 % CI: 0.76, 1.76), size (t32 = 3.01, p = 0.005, 1.36, 7.02), only two excellent, improving 2014. This suggests reporting, but not journal type, funding source outcome positivity. Reporting some items uptake Extension suboptimal. Future recommendations made.