Dataset Information

Reporting and transparent research practices in sports medicine and orthopaedic clinical trials: a meta-research study.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

Transparent reporting of clinical trials is essential to assess the risk of bias and translate research findings into clinical practice. While existing studies have shown that deficiencies are common, detailed empirical and field-specific data are scarce. Therefore, this study aimed to examine current clinical trial reporting and transparent research practices in sports medicine and orthopaedics.

Setting

Exploratory meta-research study on reporting quality and transparent research practices in orthopaedics and sports medicine clinical trials.

Participants

The sample included clinical trials published in the top 25% of sports medicine and orthopaedics journals over 9 months.

Primary and secondary outcome measures

Two independent reviewers assessed pre-registration, open data and criteria related to scientific rigour, like randomisation, blinding, and sample size calculations, as well as the study sample, and data analysis.

Results

The sample included 163 clinical trials from 27 journals. While the majority of trials mentioned rigour criteria, essential details were often missing. Sixty per cent (95% confidence interval (CI) 53% to 68%) of trials reported sample size calculations, but only 32% (95% CI 25% to 39%) justified the expected effect size. Few trials indicated the blinding status of all main stakeholders (4%; 95% CI 1% to 7%). Only 18% (95% CI 12% to 24%) included information on randomisation type, method and concealed allocation. Most trials reported participants' sex/gender (95%; 95% CI 92% to 98%) and information on inclusion and exclusion criteria (78%; 95% CI 72% to 84%). Only 20% (95% CI 14% to 26%) of trials were pre-registered. No trials deposited data in open repositories.

Conclusions

These results will aid the sports medicine and orthopaedics community in developing tailored interventions to improve reporting. While authors typically mention blinding, randomisation and other factors, essential details are often missing. Greater acceptance of open science practices, like pre-registration and open data, is needed. As these practices have been widely encouraged, we discuss systemic interventions that may improve clinical trial reporting.

SUBMITTER: Schulz R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9364413 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Reporting and transparent research practices in sports medicine and orthopaedic clinical trials: a meta-research study.

Schulz Robert R Langen Georg G Prill Robert R Cassel Michael M Weissgerber Tracey L TL

BMJ open 20220808 8

<h4>Objectives</h4>Transparent reporting of clinical trials is essential to assess the risk of bias and translate research findings into clinical practice. While existing studies have shown that deficiencies are common, detailed empirical and field-specific data are scarce. Therefore, this study aimed to examine current clinical trial reporting and transparent research practices in sports medicine and orthopaedics.<h4>Setting</h4>Exploratory meta-research study on reporting quality and transpare ...[more]

PMID: 35940834

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo survey orthopaedic sports medicine fellowship program directors to determine the current research productivity of both fellows and faculty in Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited orthopaedic sports medicine fellowship programs in the United States.MethodsAn anonymous 18-question survey was distributed via e-mail to all 95 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited orthopaedic sports medicine fellowship program directors in the United States. Descriptive statistics were used for data analysis. Questions included whether fellows are required to complete a certain number of projects during their fellowship year and whether fellows have protected research time.ResultsOf the programs, 31 (33%) responded to the survey. Twenty-four programs (80%) require fellows to complete 1 to 4 projects. Twenty-one programs (71%) provide 4 to 8 hours of weekly protected research time. Twenty-four programs (77%) publish 1 to 2 manuscripts per fellow during the fellowship. Twenty-two programs (71%) have fellows work on 1 to 2 projects at a time. Annually, 26 programs (84%) give 0 to 5 podium presentations, 24 (80%) present 0 to 5 posters, and 15 (48%) report 0 to 5 publications. Twenty-four programs (77%) have research fellows and/or assistants to help with research. The presence of dedicated research assistants and more than 25 annual fellowship program publications were found to be useful screening data for more than 2 and more than 4 average publications per fellow, respectively.ConclusionsThe research productivity of orthopaedic sports medicine fellowship programs may be an important consideration for applicants. Applicants who desire to be productive in research during their fellowship year should consider programs with dedicated research assistants and/or programs that publish more than 25 times annually.Clinical relevanceThis is a descriptive epidemiologic study that helps define the research productivity landscape in orthopaedic sports medicine fellowships. A more accurate understanding of sports medicine fellowship research experience may facilitate a better match between a program's research expectations and an applicant's research interests.

Project description:PurposeThe purpose of this study was to report demographic trends in terms of ethnicity/race and gender among the membership and leadership positions of the Arthroscopy Association of North America (AANA) and the American Orthopaedic Society of Sports Medicine (AOSSM). Over the years both AANA and AOSSM will increase in diversity through their committee membership and leadership positions.MethodsAANA and AOSSM membership and leadership were reviewed for the years 2010, 2015, and 2020. Race/ethnicity was divided into Caucasian, Asian, African American (AA), Hispanic/Latin/South American (HLSA), and Middle Eastern (ME). Gender was limited to male or female, based on name and photographic depiction.ResultsDiversity in AANA and AOSSM committee and leadership positions is summarized in Table 1 and Table 2, respectively. In 2010, 166/191 (87%) AANA committee members were Caucasian, as compared with 125/186 (67%) in 2020. Asian committee members were similar in 2010 (13/191, 7%) and 2015 (13/216, 6%) but increased to 17/186 (10%) in 2020. HLSA committee members increased from 5/191 (3%) 2010 to 11/186 (6%) in 2020. AA committee membership increased from 2/191 (1%) in 2010 to 5/186 (3%) in 2020. The diversity of AANA Board of Director leadership positions increased, with Caucasian representation decreasing from 14/14 (100%) 2010 to 11/12 (92%) in 2020 and Asian representation increasing from 0% in 2010 to 1/12 (8%) in 2020, with HLSA, AA and ME remaining the same with 0/12 (0%). In AANA, men comprised 181/191 (95%) committee members in 2010 and 166/186 (89%) in 2020. The percentage of female committee members increased from 10/191 (5%) in 2010 to 20/186 (11%) in 2020. In 2010, 73/79 (92%) AOSSM committee members were Caucasian compared to 62/81 (77%) in 2020 with AA having the largest increase in committee members from 0% in 2010 to 6/81 (7%) in 2020 (Table 2). Within AOSSM, men comprised 73/79 (92%) committee members in 2010 and 70/81 (86%) in 2020. The percentage of female committee members in AOSSM increased from 6/79 (8%) in 2010 to 11/81 (14%) in 2020.ConclusionThere has been a progressive trend toward increasing diversity in both committee membership and leadership positions in AANA and AOSSM from 2010 to 2020. Within AANA, there has been a decrease in the Caucasian representation from 87% in 2010 to 67% in 2020 and an increase in the female representation from 5% in 2010 to 11% in 2020. AOSSM demonstrated a similar trend, with Caucasian representation decreasing from 92% in 2010 to 77% in 2020, in addition to female percentage increasing from 8% in 2010 to 14% in 2020. Although there has been an increase in representation of minority and female orthopaedic surgeons within both societies, there is still room for more diversity and inclusion within committee membership and leadership. It is important to progress toward the understanding of the changes that need to be made and work to implement opening the field of orthopaedic sports medicine.

Project description:PurposeTo determine the objective characteristics of fellowship directors (FDs) in orthopaedic sports medicine by focusing on the demographics, academic background, institutional history, research experience, and professional affiliations of FDs in this field.MethodsData was collected for each FD via institutional biographies or publicly available curriculum vitae (CV). The data collected for each FD included age, gender, race/ethnicity, previous training institutions, residency and fellowship graduation years, additional advanced degrees, military affiliation, institutional loyalty, year hired by current institution, career timeline, Scopus H-index, number of publications, and total number of citations.ResultsOf the 88 FDs, 87 (98.9%) were male and 1 (1.1%) was female. The mean age for all FDs was 54.7 years (± 9.1 standard deviation). The majority of FDs were White (n = 80; 90.9%). The mean Scopus H-index, total number of publications, and total number of citations were 22.5 ± 16.6, 90.0 ± 91.6, and 2773.9 ± 3962.9, respectively. On average, it took 9.5 ± 7.3 years from fellowship graduation until FD appointment. Additionally, the mean number of years of employment or affiliation with the current institution was 17.2 ± 9.4, and the mean number of years in an FD role was 10.9 ± 9.3.ConclusionOrthopaedic sports medicine fellowship directors are largely distinguished by their high level of research productivity and accomplishment. Additionally, orthopaedic training pedigree seems to play a role in FD role attainment, with a handful of orthopaedic residency and sports medicine fellowship programs producing a large percentage of current FDs. Finally, FDs are overwhelmingly white males with little female or minority representation.Clinical relevanceThis study outlines some of the most important characteristics among orthopaedic sports medicine fellowship directors and identifies racial and gender disparities within this population of leaders that may have detrimental effects on the field as a whole.

Project description:PurposeTo evaluate the peer-reviewed orthopaedic sports medicine literature for reference errors within 2 high-impact journals.MethodsIn total, 769 references with 1,082 in-line citations were assessed from 20 randomly selected peer-reviewed articles published in 2 high-impact orthopaedic sports medicine journals, Arthroscopy and the American Journal of Sports Medicine. Full-text copies of references were obtained through online literature subscription databases. Two investigators evaluated each citation for agreement between the reference's study design, methods, data, discussion, and conclusion with the citing authors' claims. Error rates, interobserver agreement, and association between error rates and journal demographics were assessed.ResultsCohen's κ coefficient representing interobserver agreement was 0.61. The mean citation error rate across 20 articles from 2 orthopaedic sports medicine journals was 6.6%. The most common error was failure to support the authors' assertions within the citing article, accounting for 32% of errors. There was no significant association between error rate and journal impact factor, number of cited references or total references, ratio of in-line citations to cited references (citation ratio), and number of authors. There was no significant relationship between error rate and journal, study type, and level of evidence.ConclusionsInaccurate claims and citations are common within the orthopaedic sports medicine literature, occurring in every reviewed article and 6.6% of all in-line citations. Failure to support the assertions of the article in which a reference is cited is a common error. Authors should take care to rigorously assess references with particular attention to accurate citation of primary sources.Clinical relevanceThis study highlights the prevalence of citation errors within a random sampling of high-level orthopaedic sports medicine articles. Given science is cumulative, these errors perpetuate inaccuracies and are at odds with evidence-based practice.

Project description:BackgroundCannabidiol (CBD) is a known pain modulator that is garnering increased attention in the orthopaedic world. There may be a considerable knowledge gap among orthopaedic sports medicine providers and their perception of its therapeutic value.PurposeTo (1) examine the knowledge and beliefs of sports medicine orthopaedic providers with respect to CBD, (2) deliver an educational component, and (3) elucidate potential barriers to its widespread application.Study designCross-sectional study.MethodsA 3-component, 25-question online survey was distributed to members of the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine and the Arthroscopy Association of North America between July and October 2022. The first 20 questions assessed baseline knowledge and opinions regarding CBD, followed by an educational component, and then 5 questions assessing whether the respondents' opinions had changed after learning more about CBD. Responses were compared according to age, practice setting, and state's cannabinoid legalization status using the chi-square test, and changes in opinions from before to after the educational component were compared using the paired t test.ResultsThere were 101 survey responses, for a response rate of approximately 1%. Most respondents believed that there is a role for CBD in postoperative pain management (76%), acute pain and inflammation after an injury (62%), and chronic pain (94%). Most respondents admitted that they were not knowledgeable about the mechanism of action (89%) or their state's laws (66%) concerning CBD. A minority (25%) believed that CBD has psychoactive properties. While most respondents (76%) did not believe that they would be stigmatized if they were to suggest CBD to a patient, only 48% had ever suggested CBD. Notably, 94% of respondents had encountered patients who reported trying CBD to treat pain. After reading the fact sheet, 51% of respondents stated that their opinion on CBD had changed, and 63% felt inclined to investigate the topic further.ConclusionMost survey respondents believed that CBD has a role in postoperative and chronic pain management. Although there was a relative familiarity with CBD, there was a knowledge gap, suggesting that increased attention, education, and research are necessary.

Dataset Information

Reporting and transparent research practices in sports medicine and orthopaedic clinical trials: a meta-research study.

Objectives

Setting

Participants

Primary and secondary outcome measures

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Reporting and transparent research practices in sports medicine and orthopaedic clinical trials: a meta-research study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets