Reporting of Complications in Retinal Detachment Surgical Trials: A Systematic Review using the CONSORT Extension for Harms

Zheng  Yang Xu; Augusto Azuara-Blanco; Kazuaki  Kadonosono; Timothy  Murray; Sundaram  Natarajan; Samantha  Sii; William  Smiddy; David H  Steel; Thomas J.  Wolfensberger; Noemi  Lois

doi:10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2021.1836

Reporting of Complications in Retinal Detachment Surgical Trials: A Systematic Review using the CONSORT Extension for Harms

Zheng Yang Xu
, Augusto Azuara-Blanco
, Kazuaki Kadonosono
, Timothy Murray
, Sundaram Natarajan
, Samantha Sii
, William Smiddy
, David H Steel
, Thomas J. Wolfensberger
, Noemi Lois

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

8 Citations (Scopus)

406 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Question: What is the quality of reporting of harms in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) surgery?

Findings: A systematic review of RCTs in RRD surgery using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Extension for Harms checklist was conducted. The median number of checklist items reported was 8 (range, 0-15), and infrequently reported criteria included distinguishing between expected and unexpected adverse events and use of a validated instrument to report adverse event severity.

Meaning: These results suggest there are key areas that need improvement in the reporting of complications of RRD surgical trials.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	898-905
Journal	JAMA Ophthalmology
Volume	139
Issue number	8
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2021.1836
Publication status	Published - 17 Jun 2021

Access to Document

10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2021.1836Licence: Unspecified

Reporting of Complications in Retinal Detachment Surgical Trials: A Systematic Review using the CONSORT Extension for Harms
Copyright 2021 American Medical Association. This work is made available online in accordance with the publisher’s policies. Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher.
Accepted author manuscript, 1.4 MBLicence: Unspecified

Cite this

@article{7c76e2372d62436db2d514e8099a4dcf,

title = "Reporting of Complications in Retinal Detachment Surgical Trials: A Systematic Review using the CONSORT Extension for Harms",

abstract = "Question: What is the quality of reporting of harms in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) surgery? Findings: A systematic review of RCTs in RRD surgery using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Extension for Harms checklist was conducted. The median number of checklist items reported was 8 (range, 0-15), and infrequently reported criteria included distinguishing between expected and unexpected adverse events and use of a validated instrument to report adverse event severity. Meaning: These results suggest there are key areas that need improvement in the reporting of complications of RRD surgical trials.",

author = "\{Yang Xu\}, Zheng and Augusto Azuara-Blanco and Kazuaki Kadonosono and Timothy Murray and Sundaram Natarajan and Samantha Sii and William Smiddy and Steel, \{David H\} and Wolfensberger, \{Thomas J.\} and Noemi Lois",

year = "2021",

month = jun,

day = "17",

doi = "10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2021.1836",

language = "English",

volume = "139",

pages = "898--905",

journal = "JAMA Ophthalmology",

issn = "2168-6165",

publisher = "American Medical Association",

number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reporting of Complications in Retinal Detachment Surgical Trials: A Systematic Review using the CONSORT Extension for Harms

AU - Yang Xu, Zheng

AU - Azuara-Blanco, Augusto

AU - Kadonosono, Kazuaki

AU - Murray, Timothy

AU - Natarajan, Sundaram

AU - Sii, Samantha

AU - Smiddy, William

AU - Steel, David H

AU - Wolfensberger, Thomas J.

AU - Lois, Noemi

PY - 2021/6/17

Y1 - 2021/6/17

N2 - Question: What is the quality of reporting of harms in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) surgery? Findings: A systematic review of RCTs in RRD surgery using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Extension for Harms checklist was conducted. The median number of checklist items reported was 8 (range, 0-15), and infrequently reported criteria included distinguishing between expected and unexpected adverse events and use of a validated instrument to report adverse event severity. Meaning: These results suggest there are key areas that need improvement in the reporting of complications of RRD surgical trials.

AB - Question: What is the quality of reporting of harms in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) surgery? Findings: A systematic review of RCTs in RRD surgery using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Extension for Harms checklist was conducted. The median number of checklist items reported was 8 (range, 0-15), and infrequently reported criteria included distinguishing between expected and unexpected adverse events and use of a validated instrument to report adverse event severity. Meaning: These results suggest there are key areas that need improvement in the reporting of complications of RRD surgical trials.

U2 - 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2021.1836

DO - 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2021.1836

M3 - Article

SN - 2168-6165

VL - 139

SP - 898

EP - 905

JO - JAMA Ophthalmology

JF - JAMA Ophthalmology

IS - 8

ER -

Reporting of Complications in Retinal Detachment Surgical Trials: A Systematic Review using the CONSORT Extension for Harms

Abstract

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this