CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials - PubMed (original) (raw)

CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials

David Moher et al. BMJ. 2010.

No abstract available

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

None

Fig 1 Flow diagram of the progress through the phases of a parallel randomised trial of two groups (that is, enrolment, intervention allocation, follow-up, and data analysis)

None

Fig 2 Flow diagram of a multicentre trial of fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (adapted from Tonino et al313). The diagram includes detailed information on the excluded participants.

None

Fig 3 Flow diagram of minimal surgery compared with medical management for chronic gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (adapted from Grant et al196). The diagram shows a multicentre trial with a parallel non-randomised preference group.

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Rennie D. CONSORT revised—improving the reporting of randomized trials. JAMA 2001;285:2006-7. - PubMed
    1. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, Altman DG. Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA 1995;273:408-12. - PubMed
    1. Moher D. CONSORT: an evolving tool to help improve the quality of reports of randomized controlled trials. Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials. JAMA 1998;279:1489-91. - PubMed
    1. Kjaergard LL, Villumsen J, Gluud C. Quality of randomised clinical trials affects estimates of intervention efficacy. 7th Cochrane Colloquium, Rome, Italy 1999.
    1. Jüni P, Altman DG, Egger M. Systematic reviews in health care: Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. BMJ 2001;323:42-6. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources