Reporting Quality of Randomised Trials on Vital Pulp Treatments Using the Preferred Reporting Items for <scp>RAndomised</scp> Trials in Endodontics

The aim was to critically evaluate the reporting quality of randomised clinical trials (RCTs) on vital pulp treatments (VPT) published before the introduction of the Preferred Reporting Items for Randomised Trials in Endodontics (PRIRATE) 2020 guidelines. Forty-seven RCTs were identified, scored for 58 items and presented on a percentage scale. A score of '1' was given when the item was fully reported, a score of '0' when it was not reported, and '0.5' in case of inadequately reported items. Fifteen and 32 trials were given a 'High' or 'Moderate' score respectively, corresponding to > 75% and between 25%-75% scores, respectively. A large number of authors, manuscripts by authors from Europe, and endorsement of registration practices were associated with high scores. RCTs on VPT published before the introduction of the PRIRATE 2020 guidelines had suboptimal reporting quality. Future studies should adhere more strictly to guidelines to ensure high reporting quality and credibility.