The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Adequacy of Published Oncology Randomized Controlled Trials to Provide Therapeutic Details Needed for Clinical Application
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) improve clinical care through evidence-based results. Guidelines exist for RCT result reporting, but specific details of therapeutic administration promote clinical application and reproduction of the trial design. We assess the reporting methodology in RCTs published in major oncology journals. METHODS: Ten essential elements of RCT reporting were identified and included drug name, dose, route, cycle length, maximum number of cycles, premedication, growth factor support, patient monitoring parameters, and dosing adjustments for hematologic and organ-specific toxicity. All therapy-based oncology RCTs published between 2005 and 2008 in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), Journal of Clinical Oncology (JCO), Journal of the National Cancer Institute (JNCI), Blood, and Cancer were analyzed for inclusion of these 10 elements. RESULTS: Of 339 identified articles, 262 were included in the final analysis (165 from JCO, 31 from NEJM, 27 from Cancer, 20 from JNCI, and 19 from Blood). Premedication, growth factor support, and dose adjustments for toxicities were each reported less than half of the time. Only 30 articles (11%) met the main objective of complete data reporting (ie, all 10 essential elements) and was highest in JNCI (5/20; 25%), followed by Cancer (5/27; 18%), JCO (18/165; 11%), Blood (1/19; 5%), and NEJM (1/31; 3%). The presence of an online appendix did not substantially improve complete reporting. CONCLUSIONS: RCTs published in major oncology journals do not consistently report essential therapeutic details necessary for translation of the trial findings to clinical practice. Potential solutions to improve reporting include modification of submission guidelines, use of online appendices, and providing open access to trial protocols.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“However the quality of intervention description in publications is remarkably poor.”
From Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide (2014) · cites this paper as [1]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The most frequently missing elements were dose-adjustment and pre-medications, but 16% of trials omitted even the route of drug administration.”
From Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide (2014) · cites this paper as [1]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“For example, a recent analysis found that only 11% of 262 trials of cancer chemotherapy provided complete details of the trial treatments. 1”
From Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide (2014) · cites this paper as [1]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Moher, D., Schulz, K. F., & Altman, D. G. (2001) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-1-2 · Cited by 2,755
(1997) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 1,226
Spall, H. G. C. V., Toren, A., Kiss, A., & Fowler, R. (2007) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.297.11.1233 · Cited by 1,054
Munhoz, E. (2006) · Epidemiologia e Serviços de Saúde · doi:10.5123/s1679-49742006000100002 · Cited by 420
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors.
Riis, P. J. (1990) · PubMed · Cited by 415
CONSORT Revised—Improving the Reporting of Randomized Trials
Rennie, D. (2001) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.285.15.2006 · Cited by 293
Moher, D., Schulz, K. F., & Altman, D. G. (2005) · EXPLORE · doi:10.1016/j.explore.2004.11.001 · Cited by 198
Preventing medication errors in cancer chemotherapy
Cohen, M. R., Anderson, R. W., Attilio, R. M., Green, L., Muller, R. J., & Pruemer, J. M. (1996) · American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy · doi:10.1093/ajhp/53.7.737 · Cited by 120
A continuous-improvement approach for reducing the number of chemotherapy-related medication errors
Goldspiel, B. R., DeChristoforo, R., & Daniels, C. E. (2000) · American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy · doi:10.1093/ajhp/57.suppl_4.s4 · Cited by 66
Current status of administration of medicines
Shane, R. R. (2009) · American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy · doi:10.2146/ajhp0606 · Cited by 47
McNiff, K. (2006) · Journal of Oncology Practice · doi:10.1200/jop.2006.2.1.26 · Cited by 37
Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals
International Committee of Medical Journal (1991) · Annals of Clinical Biochemistry International Journal of Laboratory Medicine · doi:10.1177/000456329102800602 · Cited by 18
Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Translating Evidence Into Practice (and back)
Wolff, A. C., & Desch, C. E. (2005) · Journal of Oncology Practice · doi:10.1200/jop.1.4.160 · Cited by 9
Quality Performance Improvement With the Implementation of Standard Chemotherapy Order Forms
Dumasia, L., Harris, E., & Drelichman, A. (2006) · Journal of Oncology Practice · doi:10.1200/jop.2.3.104 · Cited by 8
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- McNiff, 2006, The Quality Oncology Practice Initiative, J Oncol Pract, 2, 26
- Blood: Information for Authors: Style Guide
- Cancer: Instructions for Authors
- Journal of Clinical Oncology: Manuscript Preparation Guidelines
- Journal of the National Cancer Institute: Instructions to Authors
- The New England Journal of Medicine: Author Center Help: Instructions for Submitting a New Manuscript
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Hoffmann, T. C., Glasziou, P. P., Boutron, I., Milne, R., Perera, R., Moher, D., Altman, D. G., Barbour, V., Macdonald, H., Johnston, M., et al. (2014) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.g1687 · Cited by 10,548
SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials
Chan, A.-W., Tetzlaff, J. M., Gotzsche, P. C., Altman, D. G., Mann, H., Berlin, J. A., Dickersin, K., Hrobjartsson, A., Schulz, K. F., Parulekar, W. R., et al. (2013) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.e7586 · Cited by 6,251
Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research
Glasziou, P., Altman, D. G., Bossuyt, P., Boutron, I., Clarke, M., Julious, S., Michie, S., Moher, D., & Wager, E. (2014) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(13)62228-x · Cited by 1,319
Increasing value and reducing waste in biomedical research: who's listening?
Moher, D., Glasziou, P., Chalmers, I., Nasser, M., Bossuyt, P. M. M., Korevaar, D. A., Graham, I. D., Ravaud, P., & Boutron, I. (2016) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(15)00307-4 · Cited by 462
Hoffmann, T. C., Erueti, C., & Glasziou, P. P. (2013) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.f3755 · Cited by 375
Metadata
- Authors
- Duff, J. M., Leather, H., Walden, E. O., LaPlant, K. D., & George, T. J.
- Affiliations
- University of Florida Health (US)
- Venue
- JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2010-05-19
- Volume
- 102
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 702-705
- ISSN
- 0027-8874 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2105
- OpenAlex
- W2118828017
- Cited by
- 103
- References
- 14
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 7.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- other-oa
- Locations
- JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Issues, ethics and legal aspects › Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare
- Keywords
- trial reporting quality, route of administration, premedication, growth factor support, translation to clinical practice, reporting guidelines
- MeSH terms
- Clinical Protocols, Humans, Medical Oncology, Neoplasms, Periodicals as Topic, Practice Patterns, Physicians', Reproducibility of Results, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Guidelines as Topic, Journalism, Medical, Evidence-Based Medicine, Benchmarking, Access to Information
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
