. . 340 348 : 4 14 1397 1392 1395

2 1

1 2 . . [email protected] : . : : 97/05 06/ : 96 11/ 30/ : . : . .

: 0 2 2 0 . 1392 1395 . 2 1 0

. (% 93 6/ ) 423 452 : % 34 . % 22 % 42 8/ 36 % 36 9/ % 56 4/ . % 3/5 % 40 7/ . % 6/6 (. (. P= /0 007 )

. : .

Downloaded from irje.tums.ac.ir at 0:57 IRST on Friday October 1st 2021 : . .( )5 .( 12) . . . .( )6 . . .( ,3 )4 341 / 1392 1395

. .( )7 . . . . . . . . 1392 1395 . . . . . 1395 1392 « . . . 56 2 . Downloaded from irje.tums.ac.ir at 0:57 IRST on Friday October 1st 2021 .( )9 . . 1392 1395 ) Chung JH . ( . .( 10 ) 2011 1986 1 17 17 469 . 452 . . 2004 Elsevier / 342

. SPSS . . . .( 11 , 12) 5 104 . 17 17 ( ) . .( 10 ) . ( ) . . 15 17 . 1395 452 ( 1 ) 1 . 1392 . (% 25 4/ ) 115 . . . (% 38 )1/ 172 2 Downloaded from irje.tums.ac.ir at 0:57 IRST on Friday October 1st 2021 (% 74 )8/ 338 . (% 12 )8/ 58 .( 1113) (% 67 5/ ) 305 . (% 31 ) 140 . (% 93 )6/ 423 (% )4/6 29 . . 23 23 423 . (% 4/5 ) ) . ( (% 54 ) 229 423 . (% 43 ) 181 . 343 / 1392 1395

5 (% 22 ) 93 91 91 . (% 34 ) 144 . . . 2 (% 40 7/ ) 184 . . 1392 1395 . (% 66 ) 114 75 (% 6/6 ) 30 (Jadad) . Jadad 1393 (% 56 )4/ 255 (% 48 ) 116 56 1395 ± . . 1392 . 199 ( 62/1 ± 55/0 ) 1393 ( 42/1 ± 64/0 ) 1395 ( 58/1 ± 59/0 ) 1394 . (P=0.007) . ( 39/1 ± 65/0 ) . 3( 3( ) .(P=0.002) 80/1 ± 42/0

. 17

.

Downloaded from irje.tums.ac.ir at 0:57 IRST on Friday October 1st 2021

15

469 17

452

. 452

1 / 344

2

1 () () () 8 )8/1( )8/1( 8 )8/5( 26 33)3/7( 1 )2/0( )2/0( 1 )4/2( 11 15( ) 68 25( 25( )4/ 115 )9/2( 13 )5/1( 7 24 )3/5( )3/5( 24 )2/4( 19 14( )2/ 64 1 )2/0( )2/0( 1 )7/2( 12 11( )1/ 50

2 (%) 27 27 9/ 126 1392 25 25 2/ 114 1393 21 21 2/ 96 1394 25 25 7/ 116 1395 Downloaded from irje.tums.ac.ir at 0:57 IRST on Friday October 1st 2021 93 93 6/ 423 4/6 4/6 29 42 42 8/ 181 22 93 2/1 2/1 5 34 34 144 54 54 229 4/5 4/5 23 40 40 4/ 171 91 91 4/ 413 6/8 6/8 39 40 40 7/ 184 59 59 3/ 268 56 56 4/ 255 36 36 9/ 167 6/6 6/6 30

345 / 1392 1395

3 (P) 131 68 /0 /0 007 137 116 236 177 /0 /0 002 32 32 7

5 . . . . . . . 14( ) . Bhandari Downloaded from irje.tums.ac.ir at 0:57 IRST on Friday October 1st 2021 . . . . 15(. 15(. ) . 94 . 33 1380 1382 . .(% 43 ) (% 34 ) . 16( ) . 34 . . / 346

1392 CONSORT . . 61 17(. ) . Fishban 39 2/ . 21 6/ 12 2/ 10 8/ P. Sjögren and A. Halling . 18( ) . 89 . 83 . 22 25 . 19( ) . . 20( ) (Online ) Downloaded from irje.tums.ac.ir at 0:57 IRST on Friday October 1st 2021 . 21( ) . . CONSORT 40 4/ . . 59 3/ . . . ... . 347 / 1392 1395

. 2164

.

1. Tahririan MA, Mousavitadi SH, Derakhshan M. Comparison of 12. Tuech J, Pessaux P, Moutel G, Thoma V, Schraub S, Herve C. functional outcomes of tibial plateau fractures treated with Methodological quality and reporting of ethical requirements nonlocking and locking plate fixations: a nonrandomized in phase III cancer trials. Journal of medical ethics. 2005; 31: clinical trial. ISRN orthopedics. 2014; 2014. 251-5. 2. Tetzlaff JM, Chan A-W, Kitchen J, Sampson M, Tricco AC, 13. Halpern SH. Choice of Local Anesthetic for Labor and Moher D. Guidelines for randomized clinical trial Delivery—Bupivacaine, Ropivacaine and Levobupivacaine. content: a . Systematic reviews. 2012; 1: Evidence-based Obstetric Anesthesia. 2005: 56-67. 43. 14. Brainard J, Wilsher SH, Salter C, Loke YK. Methodological 3. Ciolino J, Zhao W, Palesch Y. Quantifying the cost in power review: quality of randomized controlled trials in health of ignoring continuous covariate imbalances in clinical trial literacy. BMC health services research. 2016; 16: 246. randomization. Contemporary clinical trials. 2011; 32: 15. Bhandari M, Richards RR, Sprague S, Schemitsch EH. The 250-9. quality of reporting of randomized trials in the Journal of 4. Attia A. in RCTs: confounders, and Bone and Joint from 1988 through 2000. JBJS. allocation concealment. Middle East fertility society journal. 2002; 84: 388-96. 2005; 10: 258. 16. Ayatollahi M JP, Ghaem H. An evaluation of the quality of 5. Wittes J. Randomized treatment assignment. Encyclopedia of published clinical trials in Iranian medical journals during biostatistics. 1998. 2001-04. JBUMS. 2005; 7: 64-70. 6. McPherson G, Campbell M. Methods of Randomization. 17. Morteza Ghojazadeh NT, Mahsa Karkhanee, Mohammad Pharmaceutical Sciences Encyclopedia. 2010. Naghavi Behzad, Saber Azami Aghdash. Quality of 7. Rovers MM, Straatman H, Zielhuis GA. Comparison of Randomized Clinical Trial Reports Published by Iranian balanced and random allocation in clinical trials: a simulation Researchers in the Obstetrics and Gynecology Level 1 study. European journal of epidemiology. 2000; 16: 1123-9. Journals: Using CONSORT. The Iranian Journal Obstetrics 8. Scott NW, McPherson GC, Ramsay CR, Campbell MK. The and Gynecology and Infertility. 2013; 16: 7-15. method of minimization for allocation to clinical trials: a 18. Fishbane S, Hazzan AD, Shirazian S, Israel E, Strippoli GF. review. Contemporary Clinical Trials. 2002; 23: 662-74. Quality of reporting of randomization methodology in 9. Ayatollahi S, Mohammadi M, Jafary P, Khademi A. Statistics nephrology trials. Kidney international. 2012; 82: 1144-6. in international medical journals of Iran. Medical Journal of 19. Sjögren P, Halling A. Quality of reporting randomised clinical The Islamic Republic of Iran (MJIRI). 2002; 16: 59-61. trials in dental and medical research. British dental journal. 10. Chung JH, Kang DH, Jo JK, Lee SW. Assessing the quality of 2002; 192: 100-3. randomized controlled trials published in the Journal of 20. Saghaei M. Random allocation software for parallel group Korean Medical Science from 1986 to 2011. Journal of randomized trials. BMC medical research methodology.

Downloaded from irje.tums.ac.ir at 0:57 IRST on Friday October 1st 2021 Korean medical science. 2012; 27: 973-80. 2004; 4: 26. 11. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJM, 21. Suresh K. An overview of randomization techniques: an Gavaghan DJ, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of unbiased assessment of outcome in clinical research. Journal randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Controlled of human reproductive sciences. 2011; 4: 8. clinical trials. 1996; 17: 1-12.

Iranian Journal of Epidemiology Winter 2019; 14 (4): 340-348. Original Article Quality of Randomization in Clinical Trials Published in Persian Journals of Medical Sciences Indexed in Scopus during 2013-2017 Jamalian M1, Kheiri S2 1- MSc Student in Biostatistics, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences, Shahrekord, Iran 2- Professor, Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences, Shahrekord, Iran Corresponding author: Kheiri S, [email protected] (Received 19 Feb 2018 ; Accepted 28 July 2018 )

Background and Objectives : Randomization is one of the principles of correct clinical trial. The aim of this study was to determine the quality of randomization in the published articles of clinical trials in the Persian-language journals indexed in Scopus.

Methods: In this cross-sectional study, all clinical trials published in Persian journals indexed in Scopus during 2013-2017 were evaluated in terms of randomization using the Jadad scale. The score of the randomization item of this scale ranges from 0 to 2, with 0, 1, and 2 indicating poor, moderate, and good quality.

Results: A total of 452 articles were evaluated. Random allocation was indicated in 423 articles (93.6%). Simple random assignment and blocked methods were used in 42.8% and 22% of randomizations, respectively. The randomization method was unknown in 34% and an incorrect method was used for randomization in 5.3% of the articles. According to the Jadad scale, 56.4% of the articles had good, 36.9% had moderate, and 6.6% had poor quality in terms of randomization. Methodologists were consulted in 40.7% of the articles, and their contributions led to increased transparency in the randomization report (P = 0.007).

Conclusion : The randomization method and its report are missing in many clinical trials. Therefore, considering the importance of randomization in validating the results of these studies, journals editors and researchers should pay attention to the quality of randomization and its report. Keywords : Clinical trial, Randomization, Scopus, Persian journals, Jadad scale Downloaded from irje.tums.ac.ir at 0:57 IRST on Friday October 1st 2021