Reporting of placebo medication descriptors in randomised controlled trials: A review of three medical journals

Author:

Watson Michelle1ORCID,Arundel Catherine1,Clark Laura1ORCID,Cook Liz1ORCID,Sbizzera Illary1

Affiliation:

1. York Trials Unit, University of York, York, UK

Abstract

Clinical trials involving a placebo enable researchers to determine the effectiveness of a product; however, ensuring a placebo matches an active treatment takes great consideration, time and costs. We aimed to assess the reporting quality of blinding descriptions for placebo medication treatments and consider this in relation to funding support (commercial or non-commercial). The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA); the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) were searched for randomised clinical trials, and 117 papers involving a placebo medication, published between 1 April 2016 and 31 March 2017, were extracted. The data were analysed for the number of publications reporting characteristics of placebo treatments, frequency of the characteristics and source of funding. Three quarters of the articles reported at least one characteristic of the placebo. The Lancet and JAMA consistently had this information present; however, this was observed less in the NEJM. The most common characteristic was ‘matching placebo’, followed by contents of the placebo, packaging and appearance. Texture, taste and smell were least reported. Within those supported by commercial funding, two-thirds reported at least one characteristic of the placebo treatment, whilst almost all of the articles without commercial funding reported at least one characteristic. Efforts are being made to include descriptions of blinded medication; however, inconsistencies suggest that guidelines are not always being followed, and more can be done to improve reporting. Future research should focus on the reasons for inadequate recording and aim to reduce the inconsistencies observed.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3