Description

Krzyzanowski et al used a quality score to evaluate the abstracts reporting randomized clinical trials at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) meetings. This can help identify areas for improvement. The authors are from Princess Margaret Hospital and University of Toronto.


 

Items considered absolutely essential for an abstract:

(1) rationale for the study

(2) brief description of the intervention

(3) explicit definition of primary end points

(4) magnitude of difference for the primary end point

(5) statistical description of primary end point (95% confidence interval and/or 2-sided p value)

 

Items considered desirable:

(6) duration of follow-up

(7) actual sample size along with a brief description of the study participants

(8) planned sample size or power of study

(9) description of major toxicity

(10) source of funding

 

Item considered undesirable:

(11) results of a subgroup analyses not specified in the protocol

Item

Finding

Points

essential or desirable

absent

0

 

partially present

0.5

 

present

1

undesirable

absent

0

 

present

-1

 

total score =

= MAX(0,SUM(points for all 11 items))

 

Interpretation:

• minimum score: 0

• maximum score: 10

• The higher the score the better quality.

 


To read more or access our algorithms and calculators, please log in or register.