Reporting Quality of Randomized Controlled Trial Abstracts on Aesthetic Use of Botulinum Toxin: How Much Do Abstracts Actually Tell Us?

Abstract

Botulinum toxin use has become the most commonly performed aesthetic procedure among individuals of all age groups, encompassing both women and men. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) provide the highest level of evidence and quality reporting of their abstracts plays a significant role for health professionals, influencing their decision-making in patient management. Therefore, our study aimed to assess the reporting quality of published RCT abstracts for botulinum toxin aesthetic use in the head area. The CONSORT-A checklist with 17 items was used to assess the quality of reporting. All available RCT abstracts (N = 191) found by searching the Medline database that were published up until June 2023 were included in this study. The average reporting rate was 52.9%. General items were inadequately reported (30.9%), with few abstracts describing the trial design. The methods section was better reported (62.0%), with interventions, objectives, and outcomes properly reported in over 97.5% abstracts. The results section (56.9%) demonstrated good reporting of randomized participant numbers but limited reporting of primary outcomes and harms. None of the abstracts reported funding sources or randomization information. To enhance the transparency and reliability of RCT results, abstracts should adhere more rigorously to the CONSORT-A guidelines. Improved reporting in abstracts can facilitate evidence-based decision-making in everyday practice of medical professionals in the field of aesthetic medicine.

Keywords

• botulinum toxin
• botox
• cosmetic minimally invasive procedures
• aesthetic procedures
• randomized controlled trials
• reporting quality