Improving the Quality of Reports of Meta-Analyses of Randomised Controlled Trials: The QUOROM Statement.

Authors: Moher D (1) , Cook DJ (2) , Eastwood S (3) , Olkin I (4) , Rennie D (5) , Stroup DF (6)
Affiliations:
(1) University of Ottawa, Thomas C Chalmers Centre for Systematic Reviews (2) McMaster University (3) University of California, San Francisco (4) Stanford University (5) JAMA, Chicago (6) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta
Source: Onkologie. 2000 Dec;23(6):597-602.
DOI: 10.1159/000055014 Publication date: 2000 Dec E-Publication date: Jan. 15, 2001 Availability: abstract Copyright: © 2000 S. Karger GmbH, Freiburg
Language: English Countries: Not specified Location: Not specified Correspondence address: Not specified

Keywords

Article abstract

BACKGROUND:

The Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses (QUOROM) conference was convened to address standards for improving the quality of reporting of meta-analyses of clinical randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS:

The QUOROM group consisted of 30 clinical epidemiologists, clinicians, statisticians, editors, and researchers. In conference, the group was asked to identify items they thought should be included in a checklist of standards. Whenever possible, checklist items were guided by research evidence suggesting that failure to adhere to the item proposed could lead to biased results. A modified Delphi technique was used in assessing candidate items.

FINDINGS:

The conference resulted in the QUOROM statement, a checklist, and a flow diagram. The checklist describes our preferred way to present the abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of a report of a meta-analysis. It is organised into 21 headings and subheadings regarding searches, selection, validity assessment, data abstraction, study characteristics, and quantitative data synthesis, and in the results with <<trial flow>>, study characteristics, and quantitative data synthesis; research documentation was identified for eight of the 18 items. The flow diagram provides information about both the numbers of RCTs identified, included, and excluded and the reasons for exclusion of trials.

INTERPRETATION:

We hope this report will generate further thought about ways to improve the quality of reports

Find it online