Skip to main content

Table 3 Unadjusted and adjusted odds ratio of adhering to quality criteria

From: A systematic review of cluster randomised trials in residential facilities for older people suggests how to improve quality

 

Proportion adhering to criteria

Unadjusted odds ratio

Adjustedg odds ratio

Reported accounting for clustering in analysis (includes secondary reports, 84 reports)

  No statistician co-author

16/28

Reference category

 

  Co-author included statistician

44/56

3.2

(1.2,8.5)

3.1

(1.1,8.7)

  Publication prior to 2005

22/33

Reference category

 

  Journal CONSORT endorsement lowf

9/14

0.9

(0.2,3.3)

0.8

(0.2,3.3)

  Journal CONSORT endorsement mediumf

16/21

1.6

(0.5,5.5)

1.1

(0.3,4.2)

  Journal CONSORT endorsement highf

12/16

1.5

(0.4,5.8)

1.4

(0.3,6.5)

Reported accounting for clustering in sample size (unique trials, 73 reports)

  No statistician co-author

2/22

Reference category

 

  Co-author included statistician

18/51

5.4

(1.1,26.7)

2.7

(0.5,16.2)

  Publication prior to 2005

4/29

Reference category

 

  Journal CONSORT endorsement lowf

4/11

3.6

(0.7,18.0)

3.5

(0.6,18.8)

  Journal CONSORT endorsement mediumf

5/18

2.4

(0.5,10.5)

1.7

(0.4,7.7)

  Journal CONSORT endorsement highf

7/15

5.5

(1.3,23.6)

4.7

(1.0,21.8)

Identification/recruitment bias is not possible or unlikely (unique trials, 73 reports)

  No statistician co-author

12/22

Reference category

 

  Co-author included statistician

32/51

1.4

(0.5,3.9)

1.3

(0.4,4.0)

  Publication prior to 2005

15/29

Reference category

 

  Journal CONSORT endorsement lowf

9/11

4.2

(0.8,22.9)

4.1

(0.8,22.7)

  Journal CONSORT endorsement mediumf

12/18

1.9

(0.5,6.3)

1.8

(0.5,6.4)

  Journal CONSORT endorsement highf

8/15

1.1

(0.3,3.7)

10.2

(0.3,4.5)

  1. f Reference category is publication pre-2005.
  2. g Adjusted for the other variables in the table.