Search

BACKGROUND: As evidence-based medicine assumes increasing importance, there is a need for high-quality reporting of clinical studies. A recent review of clinical platelet (PLT) studies indicated variability in reporting. We undertook a critical analysis of PLT transfusion studies to determine the quality of reporting. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A systematic MEDLINE search for clinical studies of PLT transfusion was performed to identify articles. Relevant observational studies (OBS) were critiqued using the STROBE checklist and randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) using the CONSORT checklist. Studies were further evaluated with a PLT-specific checklist developed by the authors. Observations were analyzed descriptively and using Pareto analysis. RESULTS: A total of 772 articles were identified by the search. Eighty-six articles (23 RCTs and 63 OBS) met eligibility criteria. All RCTs, and a similar number of OBS (24), were randomly selected for analysis. Studies reported the scientific background and rationale, key results, and outcomes. OBS frequently did not consider bias and confounders. RCTs frequently did not explain bias, interim analyses, stopping rules, success of blinding, or weaknesses of multiple analyses. The PLT-specific critique found many studies adequately reported basics of the PLT product, PLT increment, and transfusion reactions. Studies frequently failed to report specific details of PLT compatibility, details of product preparation, and use of other blood products. CONCLUSION: Recently published articles of clinical PLT transfusion share common strengths and weaknesses. The quality of reporting may be improved by providing guidelines to authors and journal editors that list the essential elements of a well-reported clinical study of PLT transfusion.

BACKGROUND: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials and observational studies assessing platelet (PLT) transfusion therapy identified gaps in the descriptions of trial design, variables of the PLT products transfused, and outcomes. We aimed to systematically develop a reporting guideline to aid in designing, reporting, and critiquing PLT trials. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: With the use of expert opinion, a preliminary checklist of 23 items was created. The Delphi method, an iterative forecasting method, was used to achieve consensus among experts to systematically improve upon the preliminary checklist. Items were ranked for inclusion using a 7-point Likert scale from "definitely should not" to "very important to" include. Criteria were established a priori based on the mean score: at least 5.5 accept, 2.6 to 5.4 intermediate, and not more than 2.5 eliminate. Intermediate items were edited and sent out in subsequent rounds for review. Three rounds were undertaken to determine the final checklist. RESULTS: Initially 33 experts participated, decreasing to 25 by the third round. The preliminary checklist consisted of 23 items spread over four sections: methods and intervention, PLT-specific outcomes, PLT-specific results, and PLT-specific adverse events. After three rounds of the Delphi method, the checklist was expanded and refined to include 30 items. The final checklist was further enhanced by adding an explanatory guide. CONCLUSION: Use of the Delphi method was successful in finding consensus on items to include in reports of a clinical PLT transfusion study. The final checklist and explanatory guide will be useful for authors and editors to improve the reporting of PLT transfusion trials. © 2012 American Association of Blood Banks.