Adherence to CONSORT for Abstracts in Orthodontic Randomized Controlled Trials Published in Leading Journals (2018-2022)

Objective To investigate the adherence to CONSORT guidelines for reporting abstracts of orthodontic RCTs published in leading journals. Methods This retrospective observational study examined abstracts of RCTs published in four orthodontic journals (2018-2022): American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics (AJODO), Journal of Orthodontics (JO), European Journal of Orthodontics (EJO), and Angle Orthodontist Journal (AO). The abstracts were identified using keywords and then assessed for completeness based on the CONSORT for Abstracts checklist. Inter-examiner reliability was assessed to ensure consistency in scoring. Results The mean CONSORT score for adherence to reporting guidelines was 65.6%, indicating that abstracts often lacked essential information. There was variation between journals, with the American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics achieving the highest average score. The completeness of reporting varied across different CONSORT items. Essential elements like the study participants, interventions, objectives, outcomes, and conclusions were consistently reported. However, crucial methodological details such as randomization procedures, blinding techniques, recruitment status, adverse events, trial registration, and funding sources were frequently missing from the abstracts. Conclusion This study highlights the need for improved reporting quality in abstracts of orthodontic RCTs. Key areas requiring more attention include providing details on trial design, participant characteristics, and funding sources. Standardizing word count limitations across journals could potentially give authors more space to ensure comprehensive reporting within abstracts. Furthermore, by implementing these changes, researchers can ensure that abstracts provide readers with the essential information needed to make informed decisions about orthodontic treatments.