Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 Ethics-related issues reporting

From: Ethics reporting practices in randomized controlled trials of physical therapy interventions after stroke

Year 2004 (n = 13) 2009 (n = 28) 2014 (n = 39) p All studies (n = 80)
Ethic committee study approval 9 (69.2) 23 (82.1) 33 (84.6) .470b 65 (81.2)
Details about ethic committee 6 (46.2) 13 (46.4) 22 (56.4) .667c 41 (51.2)
Consent 11 (84.6) 26 (92.9) 37 (94.9) .443b 74 (92.5)
Details about the consent process 4 (30.8) 16 (57.1) 22 (56.4) .245b 42 (52.5)
Assessment of reduced cognitive competence 3 (23.1) 18 (64.3) 20 (51.3) .049b 41 (51.2)
Incentives or compensation, and details 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 3 (7.7) .278b 3 (3.8)
Funders and details 10 (76.9) 20 (71.4) 26 (66.7) .848b 56 (70.0)
Potential conflicts of interest 3 (23.1) 8 (28.6) 30 (76.9) <.001b 41 (51.2)
Statement about sample size estimates 5 (38.5) 8 (28.6) 17 (43.6) .455c 30 (37.5)
Performing of power calculations 5 (38.5) 7 (25.0) 15 (38.5) .478c 27 (33.8)
Appropriateness of comparators 10 (76.9) 24 (85.7) 34 (87.2) .638b 68 (85.0)
Matching of comparators 11 (84.6) 19 (67.9) 30 (76.9) .509b 60 (75.0)
Potential harm for participants 1 (7.7) 6 (21.4) 10 (25.6) .470b 17 (21.2)
Reporting presence/absence of adverse events 4 (30.8) 7 (25.0) 20 (51.3) .081b 31 (38.8)
Accordance with the Helsinki declaration. 0 (0.0) 3 (10.7) 6 (15.4) .403b 9 (11.2)
Number of ethics-related issues reporteda 7.5 (1.6) 8.5 (2.3) 9.9 (2.9) .009d 9.0 (2.6)
  1. Data are presented as absolute frequencies (percentages) except a mean (standard deviation)
  2. b Fisher exact test, c Pearson χ2 test, d one-way ANOVA