Abstracts of randomized controlled trials in splint therapy for temporomandibular disorders: Reporting quality and spin

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundPoor reporting quality and spin in randomized controlled trial (RCT) abstracts can lead to misinterpretation and distorted interpretation of results.ObjectivesThis methodological study aimed to assess the reporting quality and spin among RCT abstracts on splint therapy for temporomandibular disorders (TMD) and explore the association between spin and potentially related factors.MethodsThe authors searched PubMed for RCTs on splint therapy for TMD. The reporting quality of each abstract was assessed using the original 16‐item CONSORT for abstracts checklist. The authors evaluated the presence and characteristics of spin only in abstracts with nonsignificant primary outcomes according to pre‐determined spin strategies. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with the presence of spin.ResultsA total of 148 abstracts were included in the reporting quality evaluation. The mean overall CONSORT score (OCS) was 5.86 (score range: 0–16). Only interventions, objectives and conclusions were adequately reported. Of the 61 RCT abstracts included for spin analysis, spin was identified in 38 abstracts (62.3%), among which 32 abstracts (52.3%) had spin in the Results section and 21 (34.4%) had spin in the Conclusions section. A significantly lower presence of spin was found in studies with exact p‐value reporting (OR: 0.170; 95% CI: 0.032–0.887; p = .036) and a two‐arm comparison design (OR: 11.777; 95% CI: 2.171–63.877; p = .004).ConclusionsThe reporting quality of RCT abstracts on splint therapy for TMD is suboptimal and the prevalence of spin is high. More awareness and joint efforts are needed to improve reporting quality and minimize spin.