Options
Quality and Bias in Randomized Controlled Trials Published in Latin American Nursing Journals: A Meta‐Epidemiological Study
Journal
Journal of Nursing Scholarship
ISSN
1527-6546
Date Issued
2025-09-24
Author(s)
Diana Buitrago García
Melixa Medina‐Aedo
Wendy Rodriguez Vargas
Mónica Lozano Hernández
Carlos Alberto Castro
Hector Pardo‐Hernandez
Xavier Bonfill
Abstract
Introduction: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are essential for evidence‐based nursing care. However, the quality of reporting and adherence to methodological standards in Latin American nursing journals remains unclear. This study evaluates the characteristics, reporting quality, and potential risk of bias of RCTs published in Latin American nursing journals.
Objective: To assess the reporting compliance and risk of bias of RCTs published in Latin American nursing journals.
Design: Meta‐research study. Methods: A comprehensive handsearch of 29 Latin American nursing journals was performed covering publications from 2000 to 2024. Identified RCTs were assessed for adherence to CONSORT reporting guidelines and evaluated for risk of bias. Outcomes were classified using the COMET taxonomy. A descriptive analysis was performed.
Results: A total of 6377 references were screened, identifying 34 eligible RCTs, most published after 2018. The median CONSORT compliance was 19 reported items (IQR 16–22). High compliance (> 90%) was observed in abstract reporting items, study objectives, and participant selection criteria. However, critical methodological features such as randomization procedures, blinding, and protocol registration showed low adherence (< 40%). Risk of bias was mostly rated as having “some concerns”, largely due to insufficient reporting. According to the COMET taxonomy, the most frequently reported outcome domains were “Delivery of care” and “Physical functioning”.
Conclusions: Reporting compliance and risk of bias of RCTs published in Latin American nursing journals presents significant gaps, particularly in key methodological domains. These shortcomings hinder transparency, reproducibility, and integration into evidence synthesis. Strengthening editorial policies and enforcing reporting standards could enhance the quality and reliability of published research in Latin American nursing journals.
Objective: To assess the reporting compliance and risk of bias of RCTs published in Latin American nursing journals.
Design: Meta‐research study. Methods: A comprehensive handsearch of 29 Latin American nursing journals was performed covering publications from 2000 to 2024. Identified RCTs were assessed for adherence to CONSORT reporting guidelines and evaluated for risk of bias. Outcomes were classified using the COMET taxonomy. A descriptive analysis was performed.
Results: A total of 6377 references were screened, identifying 34 eligible RCTs, most published after 2018. The median CONSORT compliance was 19 reported items (IQR 16–22). High compliance (> 90%) was observed in abstract reporting items, study objectives, and participant selection criteria. However, critical methodological features such as randomization procedures, blinding, and protocol registration showed low adherence (< 40%). Risk of bias was mostly rated as having “some concerns”, largely due to insufficient reporting. According to the COMET taxonomy, the most frequently reported outcome domains were “Delivery of care” and “Physical functioning”.
Conclusions: Reporting compliance and risk of bias of RCTs published in Latin American nursing journals presents significant gaps, particularly in key methodological domains. These shortcomings hinder transparency, reproducibility, and integration into evidence synthesis. Strengthening editorial policies and enforcing reporting standards could enhance the quality and reliability of published research in Latin American nursing journals.