Lisa Caulley1, Ferrán Catalá-López2, Jonathan Whelan3, Michel Khoury3, Jennifer Ferraro3, Wei Cheng4, Don Husereau5, Douglas G Altman6, David Moher7. 1. Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Center for Journalology, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada. 2. Knowledge Synthesis Group, Clinical Epidemiology Program, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada; Department of Health Planning and Economics, National School of Public Health, Institute of Health Carlos III, Madrid, Spain; Department of Medicine, University of Valencia/INCLIVA Health Research Institute and CIBERSAM, Valencia, Spain. 3. Department of Undergraduate Medical Education, University of Ottawa, Faculty of Medicine, Ottawa, Canada. 4. Knowledge Synthesis Group, Clinical Epidemiology Program, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada. 5. Institute of Health Economics, Edmonton, Canada; Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada. 6. Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. 7. Centre for Journalology and Canadian EQUATOR Centre, Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada. Electronic address: dmoher@ohri.ca.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Appropriate use of reporting guidelines of health research ensures that articles present readers with a consistent representation of study relevance, methodology, and results. This study evaluated the use of major reporting guidelines. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A cross-sectional analysis of health research articles citing four major reporting guidelines indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection (up to June 24, 2018). Two independent reviews were performed in a random sample of 200 articles, including clinical trials (N = 50), economic evaluations (N = 50), systematic reviews (N = 50), and animal research studies (N = 50). The use of reporting guidelines to guide the reporting of research studies was considered appropriate. Inappropriate uses included the use of the reporting guidelines as a tool to assess the methodological quality of studies or as a guideline on how to design and conduct the studies. RESULTS: Across all selected reporting guidelines, appropriate use of reporting guidelines was observed in only 39% (95% CI: 32-46%; 78/200) of articles. By contrast, inappropriate use was observed in 41% (95% CI: 34-48%; 82/200), and unclear/other use was observed in 20% (95% CI: 15-26%; 40/200). CONCLUSIONS: Reporting guidelines of health research studies are frequently used inappropriately. Authors may require further education around appropriate use of the reporting guidelines in research reporting.
OBJECTIVES: Appropriate use of reporting guidelines of health research ensures that articles present readers with a consistent representation of study relevance, methodology, and results. This study evaluated the use of major reporting guidelines. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A cross-sectional analysis of health research articles citing four major reporting guidelines indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection (up to June 24, 2018). Two independent reviews were performed in a random sample of 200 articles, including clinical trials (N = 50), economic evaluations (N = 50), systematic reviews (N = 50), and animal research studies (N = 50). The use of reporting guidelines to guide the reporting of research studies was considered appropriate. Inappropriate uses included the use of the reporting guidelines as a tool to assess the methodological quality of studies or as a guideline on how to design and conduct the studies. RESULTS: Across all selected reporting guidelines, appropriate use of reporting guidelines was observed in only 39% (95% CI: 32-46%; 78/200) of articles. By contrast, inappropriate use was observed in 41% (95% CI: 34-48%; 82/200), and unclear/other use was observed in 20% (95% CI: 15-26%; 40/200). CONCLUSIONS: Reporting guidelines of health research studies are frequently used inappropriately. Authors may require further education around appropriate use of the reporting guidelines in research reporting.
Authors: Veronika W Skrivankova; Rebecca C Richmond; Benjamin A R Woolf; Neil M Davies; Sonja A Swanson; Tyler J VanderWeele; Nicholas J Timpson; Julian P T Higgins; Niki Dimou; Claudia Langenberg; Elizabeth W Loder; Robert M Golub; Matthias Egger; George Davey Smith; J Brent Richards Journal: BMJ Date: 2021-10-26
Authors: Christopher J Cadham; Marie Knoll; Luz María Sánchez-Romero; K Michael Cummings; Clifford E Douglas; Alex Liber; David Mendez; Rafael Meza; Ritesh Mistry; Aylin Sertkaya; Nargiz Travis; David T Levy Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2021-10-25 Impact factor: 2.749
Authors: Don Husereau; Michael Drummond; Federico Augustovski; Esther de Bekker-Grob; Andrew H Briggs; Chris Carswell; Lisa Caulley; Nathorn Chaiyakunapruk; Dan Greenberg; Elizabeth Loder; Josephine Mauskopf; C Daniel Mullins; Stavros Petrou; Raoh-Fang Pwu; Sophie Staniszewska Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2022-01-27 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Omar Dewidar; Irina Podinic; Victoria Barbeau; Dilan Patel; Alba Antequera; David Birnie; Vivian Welch; George A Wells Journal: ESC Heart Fail Date: 2021-11-24