Skip to main content

Table 2 Criteria for assessing the quality of reporting of abstracts of RCTs in TCM

From: Quality of reporting of trial abstracts needs to be improved: using the CONSORT for abstracts to assess the four leading Chinese medical journals of traditional Chinese medicine

Items Criteria for judgment No. of abstracts reporting each item (n = 345)
   Chinese (%) English (%)
General items    
Title Mentioned randomized or randomly allocation in the title 28(8) 25(7)
Authors Reported the contact details of corresponding author, e.g. postal address, email 344(99) 344(99)
Trial design Described as "parallel group", "cluster randomized", "crossover", etc. 7(2) 5(1)
Trial registration Reported the trial registration number and name of trial register 0(0) 0(0)
Funding Reported the source of funding for the trial 93(27) 0(0)
Participants Reported the details of the participants (included the demography, diagnosis, TCM syndrome) 234(68) 239(69)
Interventions Reported the details of the interventions for experimental group (included denomination, usage and course of treatment) 163(47) 152(44)
  Reported the details of the interventions for control group (included denomination, usage and course of treatment) 179(52) 168(49)
Objective Described as "to compare interventions(A) and (B) in patients with condition(C)" 48(14) 44(13)
Outcome Defined the primary outcome 11(3) 10(3)
Randomization Reported the method of random sequence generation 17(5) 14(4)
  Mentioned the allocation concealment (such as central randomization by telephone) 0(0) 0(0)
Blinding Specified exactly who was blinded 1(0.3) 0(0)
  Simply mentioned the trial as "single blind", or "double blind" 39(11) 39(11)
Numbers randomized Reported the number of participants randomized to each group 253(73) 253(73)
Numbers analyzed Reported the number of participants included in analysis for each group 13(4) 12(4)
Outcomes Reported the result for each group (if the primary outcome not defined, reported the result of one listed outcome) 195(57) 190(55)
  Reported effect size, precision for the difference between groups 2(1) 2(1)
Harms Reported important adverse events or side effects 50(15) 48(14)
  Clearly stated the benefits and harms when interpreting the results 4(1) 3(1)
  Only stated the benefits when interpreting the results 190(55) 190(55)