Afficher la notice abrégée

dc.contributor.authorNúñez Núñez, María 
dc.contributor.authorSaeed Khan, Khalid 
dc.contributor.authorBueno Cavanillas, Aurora 
dc.date.accessioned2023-06-06T11:10:49Z
dc.date.available2023-06-06T11:10:49Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.identifier.citationNúñez-Núñez M, Maes-Carballo M, Mignini LE, et al. Research integrity in randomized clinical trials: A scoping umbrella review. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2023;00:1-17. [doi:10.1002/ijgo.14762]es_ES
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10481/82285
dc.description.abstractBackground: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are experiencing a crisis of confidence in their trustworthiness. Although a comprehensive literature search yielded several reviews on RCT integrity, an overarching overview is lacking. Objectives: The authors undertook a scoping umbrella review of the research integ- rity literature concerning RCTs. Search strategy and selection criteria: Following prospective registration (https:// osf.io/3ursn), two reviewers independently searched PubMed, Scopus, The Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar, without language or time restrictions, until November 2021. The authors included systematic reviews covering any aspect of research integ- rity throughout the RCT lifecycle. Data collection and analysis: The authors assessed methodological quality using a modified AMSTAR 2 (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews) tool and collated the main findings. Main results: A total of 55 relevant reviews, summarizing 6001 studies (median per review, 63; range, 8–1106) from 1964 to 2021, had an overall critically low quality of 96% (53 reviews). Topics covered included general aspects (15%), design and approval (22%), conduct and monitoring (11%), reporting (38%), postpublication concerns (2%), and future research (13%). The most common integrity issues covered were ethics (18%) and transparency (18%). Conclusions: Low-quality reviews identified various integrity issues across the RCT lifecycle, emphasizing the importance of high ethical standards and professional- ism while highlighting gaps in the integrity landscape. Multistakeholder consensus is needed to develop specific RCT integrity standards.es_ES
dc.description.sponsorshipSpanish Governmentes_ES
dc.description.sponsorshipResearch institute Carlos III CM20/00074es_ES
dc.description.sponsorshipUniversidad de Granada/CBUAes_ES
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherWileyes_ES
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.subjectQuality assessmenes_ES
dc.subjectRandomized clinical triales_ES
dc.subjectResearch integrityes_ES
dc.subjectScopinges_ES
dc.subjectScoping reviewes_ES
dc.subjectUmbrella reviewes_ES
dc.subjectUmbrella review integrity issueses_ES
dc.titleResearch integrity in randomized clinical trials: A scoping umbrella reviewes_ES
dc.typejournal articlees_ES
dc.rights.accessRightsopen accesses_ES
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/ijgo.14762
dc.type.hasVersionVoRes_ES


Fichier(s) constituant ce document

[PDF]

Ce document figure dans la(les) collection(s) suivante(s)

Afficher la notice abrégée

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional
Excepté là où spécifié autrement, la license de ce document est décrite en tant que Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional