Interpretation, comparison, and combination of results of clinical trials are reliant on accurate and complete reporting of outcomes. This study aimed to assess the quality and variability in outcome reporting in immunosuppression trials following renal transplantation. All randomized controlled trials comparing immunosuppressive interventions in renal transplant recipients published over a 5-year period were included. Outcomes reported in these studies were extracted, along with data regarding completeness of reporting and whether a clear definition of the method used to measure the outcome was provided. A total of 4760 outcomes were identified from 182 studies. Overall, 90.3% outcomes were completely reported; the remainder had missing data that would preclude use in meta-analysis; 31.5% manuscripts did not define a primary endpoint. Efficacy outcomes were more likely to be clearly defined than safety outcomes (OR: 0.022, P
Journal article
Clin transplant
11/2016
30
1440 - 1448
bias, clinical trials, immunosuppression, quality, renal transplant, Graft Rejection, Humans, Immunosuppressive Agents, Kidney Transplantation, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Research Design