What do letters to the editor publish about randomized controlled trials? A cross-sectional study

12Citations
Citations of this article
15Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: To identify published letters to the editor (LTE) written in response to randomized controlled trials (RCTs), determine the topics addressed in the letters, and to examine if these topics were affected by the characteristics and results of the RCTs. Methods. Comparative cross-sectional study of a representative sample of RCTs from a set of high-impact medical journals (BMJ, Lancet, NEJM, JAMA, and Annals of Internal Medicine). RCTs and their published LTE were searched from these 5 journals in 2007. Data were collected on RCTs and their characteristics (author affiliation, funding source, intervention, and effect on the primary outcome) and the topics addressed in published LTE related to these RCTs. Analysis included chi-square and regression analysis (RCT characteristics) and thematic analysis (LTE topics). Results: Of 334 identified RCTs, 175 trials had at least one LTE. Of these, 381 published LTE were identified. Most RCTs, tested drug interventions (68%), were funded by government (54%) or industry (33%), and described an intervention that had a positive impact on the primary outcome (62%). RCT authors were primarily affiliated with an academic centre (78%). Ninety percent of the 623 LTE topics concerned methodological issues regarding the analysis, intervention, and population in the RCT. There was a significant association between funding source and impact on outcomes (p = 0.002) or type of intervention tested (p = 0.001) in these trials. Clinical and "Other" LTE topics were more likely to be published in response to a government funded RCT (p = 0.005 and p = 0.033, respectively); no other comparisons were significant. Conclusions: This study showed that most LTE are about methodological topics, but found little evidence to support that these topics are affected by the characteristics or results of the RCTs. The lack of association may be explained by editorial censorship as a small proportion of LTE that are submitted are actually published. © 2013 Kastner et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

References Powered by Scopus

Poor-quality medical research: What can journals do?

239Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Use of a journal club and letter-writing exercise to teach critical appraisal to medical undergraduates

65Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Postpublication criticism and the shaping of clinical knowledge

60Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Post-publication critique at top-ranked journals across scientific disciplines: A cross-sectional assessment of policies and practice

18Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Understanding the nature and scope of clinical research commentaries in PubMed

8Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Letters to the editor in exercise science and physical therapy journals: an examination of content and “authorship inflation”

5Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kastner, M., Menon, A., Straus, S. E., & Laupacis, A. (2013). What do letters to the editor publish about randomized controlled trials? A cross-sectional study. BMC Research Notes, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-6-414

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 4

44%

Researcher 3

33%

Professor / Associate Prof. 1

11%

Lecturer / Post doc 1

11%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 8

67%

Social Sciences 2

17%

Sports and Recreations 1

8%

Engineering 1

8%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free