Search

Copyright of Journal of Advanced Research in Health Sciences (JARHS) / Sağlık Bilimlerinde İleri Araştırmalar Dergisi (SABİAD) is the property of Journal of Advanced Research in Health Sciences (JARHS) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Purpose: Randomized controlled trial (ACT) is considered as the most reliable source of in formation in evidence-based medicine, provided that clear, transparent and detailed information are transferred to the reader. Sometimes, an abstract is the only accessible source of an RCT result. The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of RCT abstracts presented at the Turkish National Surgical Congresses. Materials and Methods: Abstract books published for three biennial Congresses of the Turkish Surgical Society (Years 2004, 2006 and 2008) were evaluated. All RCT abstracts were then identified and reviewed according to the checklist items provided by CONSORT guideline for abstract reporting. Inter-year comparisons were also performed to determine if there has been an improvement in the quality over time. Results: Among overall 2725 abstracts of verbal and poster presentations, some 100 (3.7%) were identified as an ACT and were included in the final analysis. In the majority of the abstracts, the participants (94%), objective (86%), interventions (96%), number of patients-randomized (96%) and conclusions (98%) were reported satisfactorily. Reporting of the primary outcome was the only variable that has improved over time. There were poor reporting quality for abstract title (18%), primary outcome measure (10%), and randomization (13%), blinding (15%), number of patients-analyzed (28%) and outcome (40%). There was no reported trial registration or funding at all. The median point per abstract was 7 (range = 4-14); there was no significant difference between these years. Conclusion: The overall quality of ACT abstracts presented at the Turkish National Surgical Congresses appears to be poor and should be improved for clear, transparent, and detailed information to be transferred. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]