Publications on clinical trials with X-ray contrast media: differences in quality between journals and decades.
The objective of the present study was to investigate the quality of clinical trial publications on X-ray contrast media by use of a simple criteria list with 11 items. The publication quality in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s and in five radiological journals was compared. One hundred and three articles retrieved from the literature and published in Br J Radiol (British), Acta Radiol (Scandinavian), Radiology (American), RöFo (German) and in Ann Radiol (French) were finally included. The adapted method seemed to be suitable for roughly assessing the quality of contrast medium publications. The present reporting standard has increased considerably since the 1960s, however a higher standard is still needed. Although the limited material gathered in our investigation does not allow unequivocal statements, the results indicate that the reporting standard of the 1980s in the selected American, British and Scandinavian radiological journals was somewhat better than in the German journal and better than in the French journal. Use of the present or other assessment methods is one tool to improve the reporting standard.
Andrew
E
E
Research and Development Division, Nycomed A.S., Oslo, Norway.
Eide
H
H
Fuglerud
P
P
Hagen
E K
EK
Kristoffersen
D T
DT
Lambrechts
M
M
Waaler
A
A
Weibye
M
M
D002986:Clinical Trials as Topic; D003287:Contrast Media; D006801:Humans; D010506:Periodicals as Topic; D014956:Writing
D003287:Contrast Media