nach oben

Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie

Erschienen in:

01.08.2013 | Review Article/Brief Review

Review article: Reporting Guidelines in the biomedical literature

verfasst von: James D. O’Leary, MBBCh, Mark W. Crawford, MBBS

Erschienen in: Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie | Ausgabe 8/2013

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

Complete and accurate reporting of original research in the biomedical literature is essential for healthcare professionals to translate research outcomes appropriately into clinical practice. Use of reporting guidelines has become commonplace among journals, peer reviewers, and authors. This narrative review aims 1) to inform investigators, peer reviewers, and authors of original research in anesthesia on reporting guidelines for frequently reported study designs; 2) to describe the evidence supporting the use of reporting guidelines and checklists; and 3) to discuss the implications of widespread adoption of reporting guidelines by biomedical journals and peer reviewers.

Principal findings

Inadequate reporting can influence the interpretation, translation, and application of published research. As a result, reporting guidelines have been developed in order to improve the quality, completeness, and accuracy of original research reports. Biomedical journals increasingly endorse the use of reporting guidelines for authors and peer reviewers. To date, there is encouraging evidence that reporting guidelines improve the quality of reporting of published research, but the rates of both adoption of reporting guidelines and improvement in reporting are far from ideal.

Conclusions

Use of reporting guidelines improves the quality of published research in biomedical journals. Nevertheless, the quality of research in the biomedical literature remains suboptimal despite increased adherence to reporting guidelines.

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Tsui BC, Li LX, Ma V, Wagner AM, Finucane BT. Declining randomized clinical trials from Canadian anesthesia departments? Can J Anesth 2006; 53: 226-35.PubMedCrossRef

Clark J, Tugwell P. Does academic medicine matter? PLoS Med 2006; 3: e340.PubMedCrossRef

Altman DG. The scandal of poor medical research. BMJ 1994; 308: 283-4.PubMedCrossRef

Chan AW, Altman DG. Epidemiology and reporting of randomised trials published in PubMed journals. Lancet 2005; 365: 1159-62.PubMedCrossRef

Demark-Wahnefried W, Bowen DJ, Jabson JM, Paskett ED. Scientific bias arising from sampling, selective recruitment, and attrition: the case for improved reporting. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2011; 20: 415-8.PubMedCrossRef

Blumle A, Meerpohl JJ, Rucker G, Antes G, Schumacher M, von Elm E. Reporting of eligibility criteria of randomised trials: cohort study comparing trial protocols with subsequent articles. BMJ 2011; 342: d1828.PubMedCrossRef

Glasziou P, Meats E, Heneghan C, Shepperd S. What is missing from descriptions of treatment in trials and reviews? BMJ 2008; 336: 1472-4.PubMedCrossRef

Dwan K, Altman DG, Arnaiz JA, et al. Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias. PloS One 2008; 3: e3081.PubMedCrossRef

Fanelli D. Negative results are disappearing from most disciplines and countries. Scientometrics 2012; 90: 891-904.CrossRef

10.

Anonymous. A proposal for structured reporting of randomized controlled trials. The Standards of Reporting Trials Group. JAMA 1994; 272: 1926-31.CrossRef

11.

Anonymous. Call for comments on a proposal to improve reporting of clinical trials in the biomedical literature. Working Group on Recommendations for Reporting of Clinical Trials in the Biomedical Literature. Ann Intern Med 1994; 121: 894-5.

12.

Altman DG. Better reporting of randomised controlled trials: the CONSORT statement. BMJ 1996; 313: 570-1.PubMedCrossRef

13.

Equator Network Publications. Available from URL: http://www.equator-network.org/about-equator/equator-publications0/equator-network-publications-2010/ (accessed March 2013).

14.

The EQUATOR Network. Introduction to Reporting Guidelines. Available from URL: http://www.equator-network.org/resource-centre/library-of-health-research-reporting/reporting-guidelines/introduction-to-reporting-guidelines/ (accessed April 2013).

15.

Larson EL, Cortazal M. Publication guidelines need widespread adoption. J Clin Epidemiol 2012; 65: 239-46.PubMedCrossRef

16.

Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, et al. CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 2010; 340: c869.PubMedCrossRef

17.

von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet 2007; 370: 1453-7.CrossRef

18.

Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol 2009; 62: e1-34.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Rennie D. Reporting randomized controlled trials. An experiment and a call for responses from readers. JAMA 1995; 273: 1054-5.PubMedCrossRef

20.

Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement. JAMA 1996; 276: 637-9.PubMedCrossRef

21.

Whitman NI. The Delphi technique as an alternative for committee meetings. J Nurs Educ 1990; 29: 377-9.PubMed

22.

Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D, et al. The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2001; 134: 663-94.PubMedCrossRef

23.

Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, CONSORT Group. CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. J Clin Epidemiol 2010; 63: 834-40.PubMedCrossRef

24.

Chan AW, Hrobjartsson A, Haahr MT, Gotzsche PC, Altman DG. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA 2004; 291: 2457-65.PubMedCrossRef

25.

Sackett DL. Commentary: Measuring the success of blinding in RCTs: don’t, must, can’t or needn’t? Int J Epidemiol 2007; 36: 664-5.PubMedCrossRef

26.

Montori VM, Devereaux PJ, Adhikari NK, et al. Randomized trials stopped early for benefit: a systematic review. JAMA 2005; 294: 2203-9.PubMedCrossRef

27.

Hollis S, Campbell F. What is meant by intention to treat analysis? Survey of published randomised controlled trials. BMJ 1999; 319: 670-4.PubMedCrossRef

28.

Nuovo J, Melnikow J, Chang D. Reporting number needed to treat and absolute risk reduction in randomized controlled trials. JAMA 2002; 287: 2813-4.PubMedCrossRef

29.

Hopewell S, Clarke M, Moher D, et al. CONSORT for reporting randomized controlled trials in journal and conference abstracts: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med 2008; 5: e20.PubMedCrossRef

30.

Ogrinc G, Mooney SE, Estrada C, et al. The SQUIRE (Standards for QUality Improvement Reporting Excellence) guidelines for quality improvement reporting: explanation and elaboration. Qual Saf Health Care 2008; 17(Suppl 1): i13-32.PubMedCrossRef

31.

Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, et al. The STARD statement for reporting studies of diagnostic accuracy: explanation and elaboration. The Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Group. Croat Med J 2003; 44: 639-50.PubMed

32.

Vandenbroucke JP, von Elm E, Altman DG, et al. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med 2007; 4: e297.PubMedCrossRef

33.

Ioannidis JP, Evans SJ, Gotzsche PC, et al. Better reporting of harms in randomized trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement. Ann Intern Med 2004; 141: 781-8.PubMedCrossRef

34.

Piaggio G, Elbourne DR, Altman DG, Pocock SJ, Evans SJ, CONSORT Group. Reporting of noninferiority and equivalence randomized trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement. JAMA 2006; 295: 1152-60.PubMedCrossRef

35.

Campbell MK, Piaggio G, Elbourne DR, Altman DG, CONSORT Group. Consort 2010 statement: extension to cluster randomised trials. BMJ 2012; 345: e5661.PubMedCrossRef

36.

Gagnier JJ, Boon H, Rochon P, et al. Reporting randomized, controlled trials of herbal interventions: an elaborated CONSORT statement. Ann Intern Med 2006; 144: 364-7.PubMedCrossRef

37.

Boutron I, Moher D, Altman DG, Schulz KF, Ravaud P, CONSORT Group. Methods and processes of the CONSORT Group: example of an extension for trials assessing nonpharmacologic treatments. Ann Intern Med 2008; 148: W60-6.PubMed

38.

Zwarenstein M, Treweek S, Gagnier JJ, et al. Improving the reporting of pragmatic trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement. BMJ 2008; 337: a2390.PubMedCrossRef

39.

MacPherson H, Altman DG, Hammerschlag R, et al. Revised STandards for Reporting Interventions in Clinical Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA): extending the CONSORT statement. PLoS Med 2010; 7: e1000261.PubMedCrossRef

40.

Eysenbach G, CONSORT-EHEALTH Group. CONSORT-EHEALTH: improving and standardizing evaluation reports of Web-based and mobile health interventions. J Med Internet Res 2011; 13: e126.PubMedCrossRef

41.

Davidson KW, Goldstein M, Kaplan RM, et al. Evidence-based behavioral medicine: what is it and how do we achieve it? Ann Behav Med 2003; 26: 161-71.PubMedCrossRef

42.

Moher D, Weeks L, Ocampo M, et al. Describing reporting guidelines for health research: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol 2011; 64: 718-42.PubMedCrossRef

43.

Funai EF, Rosenbush EJ, Lee MJ, Del Priore G. Distribution of study designs in four major US journals of obstetrics and gynecology. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2001; 51: 8-11.PubMedCrossRef

44.

45.

Little J, Higgins JP, Ioannidis JP, et al. STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association Studies (STREGA)—an extension of the STROBE statement. Genet Epidemiol 2009; 33: 581-98.PubMedCrossRef

46.

Gallo V, Egger M, McCormack V, et al. STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology - Molecular Epidemiology (STROBE-ME): an extension of the STROBE Statement. PLoS Med 2011; 8: e1001117.PubMedCrossRef

47.

Kelly W, Arellano F, Barnes J, et al. Guidelines for submitting adverse event reports for publication. Therapie 2009; 64: 289-94.PubMedCrossRef

48.

Kempen JH. Appropriate use and reporting of uncontrolled case series in the medical literature. Am J Ophthalmol 2011; 151(7-10): e1.PubMed

49.

Sorinola O, Olufowobi O, Coomarasamy A, Khan KS. Instructions to authors for case reporting are limited: a review of a core journal list. BMC Med Educ 2004; 4: 4.PubMedCrossRef

50.

Haidich AB. Meta-analysis in medical research. Hippokratia 2010; 14: 29-37.PubMed

51.

Moher D, Tetzlaff J, Tricco AC, Sampson M, Altman DG. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews. PLoS Med 2007; 4: e78.PubMedCrossRef

52.

Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses. Lancet 1999; 354: 1896-900.PubMedCrossRef

53.

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. J Clin Epidemiol 2009; 62: 1006-12.PubMedCrossRef

54.

Welch V, Petticrew M, Tugwell P, et al. PRISMA-Equity 2012 extension: reporting guidelines for systematic reviews with a focus on health equity. PLoS Med 2012; 9: e1001333.PubMedCrossRef

55.

Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA 2000; 283: 2008-12.PubMedCrossRef

56.

Des Jarlais DC, Lyles C, Crepaz N, TREND Group. Improving the reporting quality of nonrandomized evaluations of behavioral and public health interventions: the TREND statement. Am J Public Health 2004; 94: 361-6.PubMedCrossRef

57.

Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care 2007; 19: 349-57.PubMedCrossRef

58.

Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, et al. Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy. Clin Chem 2003; 49: 1-6.PubMedCrossRef

59.

Kottner J, Audige L, Brorson S, et al. Guidelines for Reporting Reliability and Agreement Studies (GRRAS) were proposed. J Clin Epidemiol 2011; 64: 96-106.PubMedCrossRef

60.

Hopewell S, Altman DG, Moher D, Schulz KF. Endorsement of the CONSORT Statement by high impact factor medical journals: a survey of journal editors and journal ‘Instructions to Authors’. Trials 2008; 9: 20.PubMedCrossRef

61.

Altman DG. Endorsement of the CONSORT statement by high impact medical journals: survey of instructions for authors. BMJ 2005; 330: 1056-7.PubMedCrossRef

62.

Tao KM, Li XQ, Zhou QH, Moher D, Ling CQ, Yu WF. From QUOROM to PRISMA: a survey of high-impact medical journals’ instructions to authors and a review of systematic reviews in anesthesia literature. PloS One 2011; 6: e27611.PubMedCrossRef

63.

Hopewell S, Dutton S, Yu LM, Chan AW, Altman DG. The quality of reports of randomised trials in 2000 and 2006: comparative study of articles indexed in PubMed. BMJ 2010; 340: c723.PubMedCrossRef

64.

Turner L, Shamseer L, Altman DG, et al. Consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) and the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in medical journals. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; 11: MR000030.

65.

Hopewell S, Hirst A, Collins GS, Mallett S, Yu LM, Altman DG. Reporting of participant flow diagrams in published reports of randomized trials. Trials 2011; 12: 253.PubMedCrossRef

66.

Willis BH, Quigley M. The assessment of the quality of reporting of meta-analyses in diagnostic research: a systematic review. BMC Med Res Methodol 2011; 11: 163.PubMedCrossRef

67.

Smidt N, Rutjes AW, van der Windt DA, et al. The quality of diagnostic accuracy studies since the STARD statement: has it improved? Neurology 2006; 67: 792-7.PubMedCrossRef

68.

Prady SL, Richmond SJ, Morton VM, Macpherson H. A systematic evaluation of the impact of STRICTA and CONSORT recommendations on quality of reporting for acupuncture trials. PloS One 2008; 3: e1577.PubMedCrossRef

69.

Spier R. The history of the peer-review process. Trends Biotechnol 2002; 20: 357-8.PubMedCrossRef

70.

Smith R. Opening up BMJ peer review. BMJ 1999; 318: 4-5.PubMedCrossRef

71.

Godlee F, Gale CR, Martyn CN. Effect on the quality of peer review of blinding reviewers and asking them to sign their reports: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 1998; 280: 237-40.PubMedCrossRef

72.

Hirst A, Altman DG. Are peer reviewers encouraged to use reporting guidelines? A survey of 116 health research journals. PloS One 2012; 7: e35621.PubMedCrossRef

73.

Cobo E, Cortes J, Ribera JM, et al. Effect of using reporting guidelines during peer review on quality of final manuscripts submitted to a biomedical journal: masked randomised trial. BMJ 2011; 343: d6783.PubMedCrossRef

74.

Goodman SN, Berlin J, Fletcher SW, Fletcher RH. Manuscript quality before and after peer review and editing at Annals of Internal Medicine. Ann Intern Med 1994; 121: 11-21.PubMedCrossRef

75.

Simera I, Moher D, Hirst A, Hoey J, Schulz KF, Altman DG. Transparent and accurate reporting increases reliability, utility, and impact of your research: reporting guidelines and the EQUATOR Network. BMC Med 2010; 8: 24.PubMedCrossRef

76.

Moher D, Schulz KF, Simera I, Altman DG. Guidance for developers of health research reporting guidelines. PLoS Med 2010; 7: e1000217.PubMedCrossRef

77.

Shamseer L, Galipeau J, Turner L, Moher D. Improving the reporting and usability of research studies. Can J Anesth 2013; 60: 337-44.PubMedCrossRef

78.

Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Altman DG, et al. SPIRIT 2013 statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials. Ann Intern Med 2013; 158: 200-7.PubMedCrossRef

79.

Mazumdar M, Banerjee S, Van Epps HL. Improved reporting of statistical design and analysis: guidelines, education, and editorial policies. Methods Mol Biol 2010; 620: 563-98.PubMedCrossRef

80.

Pua HL, Lerman J, Crawford MW, Wright JG. An evaluation of the quality of clinical trials in anesthesia. Anesthesiology 2001; 95: 1068-73.PubMedCrossRef

Titel: Review article: Reporting Guidelines in the biomedical literature
verfasst von: James D. O’Leary, MBBCh
Mark W. Crawford, MBBS
Publikationsdatum: 01.08.2013
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie / Ausgabe 8/2013
Print ISSN: 0832-610X
Elektronische ISSN: 1496-8975
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-013-9973-z

Update AINS

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

hier abonnieren

Springer Medizin

Review article: Reporting Guidelines in the biomedical literature

Abstract

Purpose

Principal findings

Conclusions

Neu im Fachgebiet AINS

Akuter Schwindel: Wann lohnt sich eine MRT?

Bei schweren Reaktionen auf Insektenstiche empfiehlt sich eine spezifische Immuntherapie

Hinter dieser Appendizitis steckte ein Erreger

Ärztliche Empathie hilft gegen Rückenschmerzen

Update AINS

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Principal findings

Conclusions

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 8/2013

Operating Room Leadership and Management

Anesthesiologists’ learning curves for bedside qualitative ultrasound assessment of gastric content: a cohort study

Evaluation of a novel mouse model of intracisternal strychnine-induced trigeminal allodynia

Broken heart syndrome triggered by an obstructive goiter not associated with thyrotoxicosis

Massive transfusion and adverse postoperative outcomes: the message behind the drama

Focused ultrasound is the next step in perioperative care

Neu im Fachgebiet AINS

Akuter Schwindel: Wann lohnt sich eine MRT?

Bei schweren Reaktionen auf Insektenstiche empfiehlt sich eine spezifische Immuntherapie

Hinter dieser Appendizitis steckte ein Erreger

Ärztliche Empathie hilft gegen Rückenschmerzen

Update AINS