Reporting quality for abstracts of randomised trials on child and adolescent depression prevention: a meta-epidemiological study on adherence to CONSORT for abstracts

• Published in: BMJ open 2022-08, Vol.12 (8), p.e061873-e061873
• Main Authors: Wiehn, Jascha, Nonte, Johanna, Prugger, Christof
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Child & adolescent psychiatry; Depression & mood disorders; Impact factors; Information sources; Mental depression; Mental Health; PAEDIATRICS; Pediatrics; Prevention; STATISTICS & RESEARCH METHODS; Teenagers
• ISSN: 2044-6055; 2044-6055
• DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-061873

ObjectivesThis study aimed to investigate adherence to Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) for abstracts in reports of randomised trials on child and adolescent depression prevention. Secondary objective was to examine factors associated with overall reporting quality.DesignMeta-epidemiological study.Data sourcesWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, PsycArticles and CENTRAL.Eligibility criteriaTrials were eligible if the sample consisted of children and adolescents under 18 years with or without an increased risk for depression or subthreshold depression. We included reports published from 1 January 2003 to 8 August 2020 on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster randomised trials (CRTs) assessing universal, selective and indicated interventions aiming to prevent the onset of depression or reducing depressive symptoms.Data extraction and synthesisAs the primary outcome measure, we assessed for each trial abstract whether information recommended by CONSORT was adequately reported, inadequately reported or not reported. Moreover, we calculated a summative score of overall reporting quality and analysed associations with trial and journal characteristics.ResultsWe identified 169 eligible studies, 103 (61%) RCTs and 66 (39%) CRTs. Adequate reporting varied considerably across CONSORT items: while 9 out of 10 abstracts adequately reported the study objective, no abstract adequately provided information on blinding. Important adverse events or side effects were only adequately reported in one out of 169 abstracts. Summative scores for the abstracts’ overall reporting quality ranged from 17% to 83%, with a median of 40%. Scores were associated with the number of authors, abstract word count, journal impact factor, year of publication and abstract structure.ConclusionsReporting quality for abstracts of trials on child and adolescent depression prevention is suboptimal. To help health professionals make informed judgements, efforts for improving adherence to reporting guidelines for abstracts are needed.