Methodology and reporting quality of reporting guidelines: systematic review

Abstract

BackgroundWith increasing attention put on the methodology of reporting guidelines, Moher et al. conducted a review of reporting guidelines up to December 2009. Information gaps appeared on many aspects. Therefore, in 2010, the Guidance for Developers of Health Research Reporting Guidelines was developed. With more than four years passed and a considerable investment was put into reporting guideline development, a large number of new, updated, and expanded reporting guidelines have become available since January 2010. We aimed to systematically review the reporting guidelines published since January 2010, and investigate the application of the Guidance.MethodsWe systematically searched databases including the Cochrane Methodology Register, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, and retrieved EQUATOR and the website (if available) to find reporting guidelines as well as their accompanying documents. We screened the titles and abstracts resulting from searches and extracted data. We focused on the methodology and reporting of the included guidelines, and described information with a series of tables and narrative summaries. Data were summarized descriptively using frequencies, proportions, and medians as appropriate.ResultsTwenty-eight and 32 reporting guidelines were retrieved from databases and EQUATOR network, respectively. Reporting guidelines were designed for a broad spectrum of types of research. A considerable number of reporting guidelines were published and updated in recent years. Methods of initial items were given in 45 (75 %) guidelines. Thirty-eight (63 %) guidelines reported they have reached consensus, and 35 (58 %) described their consensus methods. Only 9 (15 %) guidelines followed the Guidance.ConclusionsOnly few guidelines were developed complying with the Guidance. More attention should be paid to the quality of reporting guidelines.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12874-015-0069-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Development of a Core Outcome Set for studies evaluating the effects of anaesthesia on perioperative morbidity and mortality following hip fracture surgery

“…18 Previous working groups aiming to achieve standardised endpoints within healthcare 21,22 have seldom adopted a formal consensus gathering process, such as the one used in this study. 23 A review of healthcare guideline development by Wang and colleagues 24 found that >30% did not report how a consensus was gained and the remaining did so poorly. It is vital to ensure that high standards and consistency regarding methodology are implemented.…”

PRICE 2020 guidelines for reporting case reports in Endodontics: a consensus‐based development

“…There is general consensus that reporting guidelines are important for improving the quality of medical research (Wang et al . 2015). The CAse REport (CARE) guidelines (Gagnier et al 2013) were developed through a consensus process, aimed at improving the reporting of information in case reports within the field of Medicine.…”

Reporting quality of the Delphi technique in reporting guidelines: a protocol for a systematic analysis of the EQUATOR Network Library

“…Additionally, insufficient reporting impedes the applicability and misrepresents results used by patients and practitioners 1. To improve the quality of research, experts have developed reporting guidelines 2. Reporting guidelines are important tools for improving the quality of medical research 2.…”

“…To improve the quality of research, experts have developed reporting guidelines 2. Reporting guidelines are important tools for improving the quality of medical research 2. The number of reporting guidelines in the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) Network’s Library has increased.…”