APS Aesthetic Plastic Surgery · 2026

CONSORT Compliance of Randomized Controlled Trials in Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review

Mitchell S, Yousif YF, Zien M, Memisoglu YO, Al-Bassam N, Al Saidi YH, Ming HYM, Yousuff M, Mansour HRK, Daneshi K, Khajuria A.

PubMed 41714369 Publisher (DOI)Free full text (PMC)

What this paper says

Ninety-seven rhinoplasty randomised trials from 2017 to 2024 met on average 68.8% of CONSORT reporting items, with trial registration (53.6%) and funding disclosure (51.5%) the weakest, 94.8% single-centre, 47.4% with 50 or fewer participants, and 68.8% from the Middle East.

Overview

Randomised trials are the strongest evidence, but only if reported transparently. The authors searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Google Scholar and MEDLINE for rhinoplasty RCTs published 2017-2024 and scored each against the 25-item CONSORT-NPT checklist for non-pharmacological treatments, with Cochrane risk-of-bias and GRADE assessment.

Sections of note

97 trials; mean CONSORT adherence 68.8%.
Well reported: objectives 97.9%, structured abstracts 94.8%.
Poorly reported: trial registration 53.6%, funding 51.5%.
94.8% single centre; 47.4% enrolled 50 or fewer participants; 68.8% from the Middle East.
No correlation between adherence and journal impact factor or author count; quality mostly high or moderate by GRADE.

What it means for a patient

Many rhinoplasty "randomised trials" are small, single-centre and incompletely reported; a trial label does not guarantee strong evidence.
Nearly half of these trials were not registered in advance, which allows selective reporting.
The geographic concentration means results may not transfer to other populations.

Why this paper matters

It audits the quality of the trial evidence base that patient information (including this site) relies on. Limits: reporting quality is not the same as trial validity; 2017-2024 window only.

Terms

CONSORT: Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials, a checklist for RCT reports.
CONSORT-NPT: the CONSORT extension for non-pharmacological treatments such as surgery.
Trial registration: publicly recording a trial's plan before it starts.
GRADE: a system for rating certainty of evidence.
External validity: how well results apply to other settings and populations.

Summary written by rhinoplasty.cc from the abstract, 2026-09-08; not medical advice. The authors' own abstract follows.

Abstract

Background: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are essential for evaluating surgical interventions, yet adherence to CONSORT reporting guidelines remains inconsistent. Transparent reporting is especially critical in rhinoplasty due to individualized outcomes and diverse surgical techniques. This systematic review assesses adherence to the CONSORT-NPT guidelines in rhinoplasty RCTs and identifies key reporting deficiencies.

Methods: A systematic review following PRISMA and AMSTAR-2 guidelines was conducted. Databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and MEDLINE were searched for rhinoplasty RCTs published between 2017 and 2024. Adherence to the 25-item CONSORT-NPT checklist was evaluated, and study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and GRADE framework. Descriptive statistics summarized compliance trends, and correlations with journal impact factor and author count were analyzed.

Results: Ninety-seven studies met inclusion criteria, with a mean CONSORT adherence of 68.8%. Objectives (97.9%) and structured abstracts (94.8%) were well reported; however, trial registration (53.6%) and funding disclosures (51.5%) were inconsistently provided. Most trials were single center (94.8%), with limited participants (47.4% of studies enrolled 50 or fewer participants), reducing generalizability. No significant correlations emerged between CONSORT adherence and journal impact factor or author count. Most studies (68.8%) originated from the Middle East. Study quality was generally high or moderate according to GRADE, with predominantly low or moderate risk of bias.

Conclusion: Although CONSORT adherence in rhinoplasty RCTs is moderate, substantial gaps persist in trial registration, funding disclosure, and core methodological reporting. Strengthening enforcement of CONSORT guidelines is the foremost priority for improving research quality. Broader collaboration and geographic inclusion may support external validity but are secondary to rigorous reporting standards. Addressing these deficits will strengthen patient safety, reproducibility, and evidence-based counseling in rhinoplasty.

Level Of Evidence I: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Abstract as indexed by PubMed; the article is open access (PubMed Central).