Impact of an online writing aid tool for writing a randomized trial report: The COBWEB (Consort-based WEB tool) randomized controlled trial

78Citations
Citations of this article
105Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Incomplete reporting is a frequent waste in research. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of a writing aid tool (WAT) based on the CONSORT statement and its extension for non-pharmacologic treatments on the completeness of reporting of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods: We performed a 'split-manuscript' RCT with blinded outcome assessment. Participants were masters and doctoral students in public health. They were asked to write, over a 4-hour period, the methods section of a manuscript based on a real RCT protocol, with a different protocol provided to each participant. Methods sections were divided into six different domains: 'trial design', 'randomization', 'blinding', 'participants', 'interventions', and 'outcomes'. Participants had to draft all six domains with access to the WAT for a random three of six domains. The random sequence was computer-generated and concealed. For each domain, the WAT comprised reminders of the corresponding CONSORT item(s), bullet points detailing all the key elements to be reported, and examples of good reporting. The control intervention consisted of no reminders. The primary outcome was the mean global score for completeness of reporting (scale 0-10) for all domains written with or without the WAT. Results: Forty-one participants wrote 41 different manuscripts of RCT methods sections, corresponding to 246 domains (six for each of the 41 protocols). All domains were analyzed. For the primary outcome, the mean (SD) global score for completeness of reporting was higher with than without use of the WAT: 7.1 (1.2) versus 5.0 (1.6), with a mean (95 % CI) difference 2.1 (1.5-2.7; P <0.01). Completeness of reporting was significantly higher with the WAT for all domains except for blinding and outcomes. Conclusion: Use of the WAT could improve the completeness of manuscripts reporting the results of RCTs. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov ( http://clinicaltrials.govNCT02127567 , registration date first received April 29, 2014)

References Powered by Scopus

CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials.

4607Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Extending the CONSORT statement to randomized trials of nonpharmacologic treatment: Explanation and elaboration

1869Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence

1557Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

46644Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

6132Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: Updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews

6132Citations
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

Barnes, C., Boutron, I., Giraudeau, B., Porcher, R., Altman, D. G., & Ravaud, P. (2015). Impact of an online writing aid tool for writing a randomized trial report: The COBWEB (Consort-based WEB tool) randomized controlled trial. BMC Medicine, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0460-y

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 39

57%

Professor / Associate Prof. 13

19%

Researcher 13

19%

Lecturer / Post doc 3

4%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 28

48%

Nursing and Health Professions 12

21%

Psychology 12

21%

Social Sciences 6

10%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Mentions
Blog Mentions: 2
Social Media
Shares, Likes & Comments: 8

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free