نوع مقاله : مروری
نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکترای تخصصی بهداشت باروری، کمیته تحقیقات دانشجویی، دانشکده پرستاری و مامایی، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی مشهد، مشهد، ایران.
2 دانشیار بهداشت باروری، مرکز تحقیقات مراقبت مبتنی بر شواهد، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی مشهد، مشهد، ایران. دانشیار بهداشت باروری، گروه مامایی، دانشکده پرستاری و مامایی، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی مشهد، مشهد، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Introduction: Randomized controlled trials are critical and important studies in medical sciences. Due to the vital role of such studies in production of valid scientific evidence in the promotion of maternal health, this study was performed with aim to assess the quality of clinical trials in relation to the efficacy of massage therapy on labor pain intensity published by Iranian authors using CONSORT criteria.
Methods: In this descriptive study, published Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) in relation to the efficacy of massage therapy on labor pain intensity were evaluated in Persian and English journals which are indexed in Google scholar, PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL as well as Persian databases such as SID, IranMedx, IRANDOC, and Magiran using the keywords of labor pain, massage, and randomized clinical trials from 1995 to 2017. Out of 155 articles, 20 RCTs were assessed using CONSORT, 2010 checklist. The minimum and maximum score of the checklist was zero and 37, respectively. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistical tests with SPSS software (version 14).
Results: Based on the results of 20 selected articles about the effect of massage therapy on labor pain intensity, the overall accordance of the RCTs with CONSORT criteria was 54%. Totally, the highest defect was related to the section of methods and materials; in the items of this section, the highest defect was related to sample size, method used for randomized allocation and the method of blinding. The mean overall score of articles was 20.15±3.18 in the minimum and maximum range of 12-27. The highest percentage of reporting quality criteria was related to the methodology section, which was estimated to be 42%.
Conclusion: The most common weakness of authors in reporting the results of RCTs was seen in the section of materials and methods which could be improved by more training of these issues, use of statistics and methodology specialists and also using of standard tools for self-evaluation of the articles.
کلیدواژهها [English]
Hopewell S, Dutton S, Yu LM, Chan AW, Altman DG. The quality of reports of randomised trials in 2000 and 2006: comparative study of articles indexed in PubMed. BMJ 2010; 340:c723