title: [Abstruse comparisons in abstracts of clinical trials in Spanish medical journals].
abstract: BACKGROUND
  To describe the frequency of abstracts of clinical trials whose information does not allow to assess the clinical relevance of the comparisons made.
  
  
  METHODS
  Review of 64 trials published in the journals Atención Primaria and Medicina Clínica. Abstracts were defined as quantitative or qualitative abtruse when it was not possible to identify the numerical values used in the comparison or when scales were included without specifying their range and clinical implications, respectively.
  
  
  RESULTS
  43.7% of abstracts were deemed quantitively abstruse, and 75% of 8 including scales were deemed qualitatively abstruse.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Abstracts of clinical trials should present results in a way that makes it possible to evaluate
authors.affiliation: Fundación Instituto de Investigación en Servicios de Salud, Valencia, Spain.
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Librero
authors.forename: S
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Peiró
mesh_terms: D002986:Clinical Trials as Topic; D006801:Humans; D011643:Publishing