Are endodontic abstracts of published randomized clinical trials reported adequately?

Introduction: The aim is to assess the randomized clinical trials reporting quality of abstract in two main endodontic journals and their adherence with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines. Materials and Methods: A hand search looking for all randomized clinical trials published in two endodontic journals; the International Endodontic Journal (IEJ) and the Journal of Endodontics (JOE) from 2012 to 2019; was carried out. A modified CONSORT abstracting checklist was followed and the data were analyzed descriptively. Results: A total of 140 abstracts gathered and distributed as 18% in the IEJ and 82% in the JOE. The overall mean score for reporting quality was 49.7%. There was 100% checklist score in authors' details, objectives, interventions, outcome, and conclusion. Deficient reporting in the randomization procedures, blinding, and allocation concealment was present in most of the abstracts. There was no mention of registrations and funding sources in any included abstract. Conclusions: The randomized clinical trials reporting quality of abstract in endodontic journals are suboptimal. More adherence to the CONSORT guidelines is recommended.