Improving Clinical Practice Through Better Evidence: A Cross-Sectional Evaluation of the Reporting Quality in Contact Dermatitis Randomized Controlled Trial Abstracts

Contact dermatitis is a highly prevalent inflammatory disease of the skin with substantial impact on patients’ quality of life and occupational function. Although randomized controlled trials (RCTs) provide the highest level of evidence for treatment evaluation, previous research has shown that the reporting quality of RCT abstracts is often suboptimal. This study aimed to assess the completeness of reporting of RCT abstracts on contact dermatitis according to the CONSORT extension for abstracts (CONSORT-A). A cross-sectional analysis of 304 abstracts indexed in PubMed between 1975 and 2024 was conducted. Each abstract was independently evaluated by two reviewers using the 17-item CONSORT-A checklist, with inter-rater agreement calculated by Cohen’s κ. The median adherence score was 5 out of 17 items (29.4%), with a range from 1 (5.9%) to 14 (82.4%). The reporting of study aims (82.9%), interventions (82.2%), and conclusions (91.1%) was frequent, whereas critical methodological elements such as participant criteria (4.6%), randomization (2.0%), trial registration (3.0%), and funding (0.7%) were rarely reported. Structured abstracts, hospital settings, significant study results, and more than seven authors were independent predictors of higher adherence in multivariate analysis. Abstracts published after 2008, when CONSORT-A was introduced, showed modest but significant improvement. These findings indicate that reporting quality of contact dermatitis RCT abstracts remains inadequate, underscoring the need for stricter journal requirements, structured abstract formats, and broader dissemination of CONSORT-A guidelines.