title: The quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials in pelvic organ prolapse.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) must comply with the strict rules of design and conduct and their reporting should reflect it. Our aim was to evaluate how the quality of RCT reporting in pelvic organ prolapse (POP) has evolved.
  
  
  METHODS
  RCTs in POP published between 1997 and 2010 were retrieved through a PubMed search. The quality of reporting was assessed by applying the 2010 revised Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement. Appropriate statistical analysis was performed.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Forty-one RCTs were identified for review. The implementation of randomization, recruitment, blinding, outcomes with effect size and precision, trial registration, and full protocol availability were reported in less than half of the trials. Comparing two periods (1997-2006 and 2007-2010), there was no improvement in the quality of reporting for any of the CONSORT criteria.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  RCTs in POP are scarce. The quality of reporting is suboptimal in many aspects and has not improved in recent years.
authors.affiliation: Department of Urology, Centro Hospitalar do Porto, Porto, Portugal. vcavadas@gmail.com
authors.forename: Vítor
authors.initials: V
authors.lastname: Cavadas
authors.forename: Frederico
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Branco
authors.forename: Filipe L
authors.initials: FL
authors.lastname: Carvalho
authors.forename: Luís
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Osório
authors.forename: Mário J
authors.initials: MJ
authors.lastname: Gomes
authors.forename: Miguel
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Silva-Ramos
mesh_terms: D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D056887:Pelvic Organ Prolapse; D016032:Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic / Q000379:methods* / Q000592:standards*; D012107:Research Design / Q000592:standards*