You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 167 No. 9, May 14, 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Commentary
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (2)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Medical Practice
 •Medical Ethics
 •Quality of Care
 •Evidence-Based Medicine
 •Statistics and Research Methods
 •Randomized Controlled Trial
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Guidelines and Consensus Statements Regarding the Conduction and Reporting of Clinical Research Studies

Matthew E. Falagas, MD, MSc, DSc; Eleni I. Pitsouni, MD

Arch Intern Med. 2007;167(9):877.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

During the last 2 decades, various groups of investigators have developed and published guidelines and consensus statements aiming to help researchers improve the quality of conduction and reporting of research projects. It was stated that the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials has improved with the use of the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement.1 However, the use of such statements has not been very common for studies using other methods. For example, a recent study suggested that the quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies has not improved considerably over time.2

We believe that a proportion of authors may not use the available relevant guidelines and consensus statements simply because they are not fully aware of their existence or because they have difficulties in identifying the appropriate document to use. We sought to compile a list of . . . [Full Text of this Article]


AUTHOR INFORMATION


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Databases of Biomedical Literature: Getting the Whole Picture Reply
Falagas
Arch Intern Med 2008;168:113-114.
FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2007 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.