[CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (Chinese version)]

Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and validity of trial findings nor extract information for systematic reviews. Recent methodological analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which are considered the gold standard for evaluating interventions because of their ability to minimise or avoid bias. A group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. It was first published in 1996 and updated in 2001. The statement consists of a checklist and flow diagram that authors can use for reporting an RCT. Many leading medical journals and major international editorial groups have endorsed the CONSORT statement. The statement facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs. During the 2001 CONSORT revision, it became clear that explanation and elaboration of the principles underlying the CONSORT statement would help investigators and others to write or appraise trial reports. A CONSORT explanation and elaboration article was published in 2001 alongside the 2001 version of the CONSORT statement. After an expert meeting in January 2007, the CONSORT statement has been further revised and is published as the CONSORT 2010 Statement. This update improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias. This explanatory and elaboration document-intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the CONSORT statement-has also been extensively revised. It presents the meaning and rationale for each new and updated checklist item providing examples of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies. Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT 2010 Statement, this revised explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated website (www.consort-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomised trials.

Multiple LRRK2 variants modulate risk of Parkinson disease: a Chinese multicenter study

We and others found two polymorphic LRRK2 (leucine-rich repeat kinase 2) variants (rs34778348:G>A; p.G2385R and rs33949390:G>C; p.R1628P) associated with Parkinson disease (PD) among Chinese patients, but the common worldwide rs34637584:G>A; p.G2019S mutation, was absent. Focusing exclusively on Han Chinese, we first sequenced the coding regions in young onset and familial PD patients and identified 59 variants. We then examined these variants in 250 patients and 250 control subjects. Among the 17 polymorphic variants, five demonstrated different frequency in cases versus controls and were considered in a larger sample of 1,363 patients and 1,251 control subjects. The relative risk of an individual with both p.G2385R and p.R1628P is about 1.9, and this is reduced to 1.5-1.6 if the individual also carries rs7133914:G>C; p.R1398H or rs7308720:C>A: p.N551K. The risk of a carrier with p.R1628P is largely negated if the individual also carries p.R1398H or p.N551K. In dopaminergic neuronal lines, p.R1398H had significantly lower kinase activity, whereas p.G2385R and p.R1628P showed higher kinase activity than wild type. We provided the first evidence that multiple LRRK2 variants exert an individual effect and together modulate the risk of PD among Chinese.