Quality of Reporting and Study Design of CKD Cohort Studies Assessing Mortality in the Elderly Before and After STROBE: A Systematic Review

Rao, Anirudh; Brück, Katharina; Methven, Shona; Evans, R. J.; Stel, Vianda S.; Jager, Kitty J.; Hooft, Lotty; Ben-Shlomo, Yoav; Caskey, Fergus

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0155078

Cited by 23 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 45 publications

(36 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…With continued efforts from researchers and with a particular focus on the domains identified as deficient by the STROBE statement, this presents an opportunity to improve the reporting of observational research so as to make it useful in evidence-based medicine. With increased awareness by authors and editors regarding compliance of manuscripts to the STROBE-M checklist and journal endorsement of the same, we hope that not only reporting but also the design and conduct of future studies will be improved (21). Finally, we will like to mention that, based on our experience in scoring 45 publications, we firmly believe that the STROBE-M checklist with the proposed scoring system is a useful tool for assessing the reporting quality of the observational studies.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One of the main goals of reporting guidelines is to improve reporting clarity and not necessarily improve the quality of research, but in due course achieve it as an indirect effect. Inadequate reporting not only hinders critical assessment by others of the strengths and weaknesses in study design, conduct, and analysis, but it also affects the judgement of whether and how results can be included in systematic reviews and impacts on the readersí assessment of studiesí generalizability (21). This study has shown that it is feasible to develop a scoring method for STROBE checklist that can be used to assess the reporting quality of observational (cross-sectional, case-control and cohort) studies.…”

Section: Strobe-m Guideline Was Developed Years Back (4) To Ensure Amentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This might lead to differences in quality rating when it is done by multiple reviewers. Scoring method for items can provide quantitative estimates of quality that could improve the quality of reporting and lead to more transparent judgements about the quality of evidence (21). It may also improve the data interpretation, generalizability and clinical utility of the reported study (22).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Development of a Quantitative Scoring Method for Strobe Checklist

Limaye¹,

Limaye²,

Pitani³

et al. 2018

Acta Poloniae Pharmaceutica - Drug Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evidence-based medicine (EBM) has brought a substantial change in medical practice and clinical care approach (1-3). It has helped to focus on valid and reliable information to make sound decisions in the area of disease management. Although randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are considered as the reference standard and provide valuable evidence about the efficacy of new treatments, yet they do not answer all important questions about the specific treatment. Most of the knowledge in clinical practice comes from observational studies from which we can gain further experience to plan interventional studies in regards to efficacy, safety and tolerability of approved medicines (4). An observational study is defined as a study that provides estimates and examines associations of events in their natural settings without recourse to experimental intervention (5). It includes cohort studies (CO) ñ prospective and retrospective, crosssectional studies (CS), and case-control studies (CC) (6). Current evidence suggests that observational studies, such as those discussed earlier, both com

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Strobe-m Guideline Was Developed Years Back (4) To Ensure Amentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Development of a Quantitative Scoring Method for Strobe Checklist

Limaye¹,

Limaye²,

Pitani³

et al. 2018

Acta Poloniae Pharmaceutica - Drug Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A few articles have evaluated the reporting quality of observational studies in other medical disciplines. Several studies have found that the reporting quality of articles that used the STROBE statement for standardization was better than that of others [19,20,25,26]. Jacqueline Ramke et al used the STROBE statement to evaluate reporting in blindness prevalence surveys and found that the mean of the STROBE score of studies published in journals requiring the STROBE statement was higher than that for others [19].…”

Section: Compared With Other Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the reporting quality of observational studies in master of public health dissertations in China

Dai

Zhou

et al. 2020

BMC Med Res Methodol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Backgrounds Master of public health (MPH) plays an important role in Chinese medical education, and the dissertations is an important part of MPH education. In MPH dissertations, most are observational studies. Compared with randomized controlled trial (RCT), observational studies are more prone to information bias. So, the reporting of the observational studies should be transparent and standard. But, no research on evaluating the reporting quality of the MPH dissertation has been found. Methods A systematic literature search was performed in the Wanfang database from January 1, 2014 to May 31, 2019. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observation Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement was adopted to evaluate the reporting quality of the selected studies. Articles that met the following criteria were selected: (1) observational studies, including cross-sectional studies, case-control studies, and cohort studies; (2) original articles; (3) studies on humans, including both adults and children. Results The Median of compliance to individual STROBE items was 74.79%. The mean (standard deviation) of STROBE score was 14.29 (1.84). Five items/sub-items were 100% reported (“reported” and “partly reported” were combined): background, objectives, study design, report numbers of individuals at each stage, and key result. Fifteen items/sub-items were reported by 75% or more. Reporting of methods and results was often omitted: missing data (6.67%), sensitivity analyses (3.63%), flow diagram (15.15%), and absolute risk (0%). Logistic regression analysis indicated that cohort studies (OR = 3.41, 95% CI = 1.27–9.16), funding support (OR = 4.37, 95% CI = 1.27–9.16) and more published papers during postgraduate period (OR = 3.46, 95% CI = 1.40–8.60) were related to high reporting quality. Conclusion In short, the reporting quality of observational studies in MPH’s dissertations in China is suboptimal. However, it’s necessary to improve the reporting of method and results sections. We recommend that authors should be stricter to adhere STROBE statement when conducting observational studies.

show abstract

“…Several studies have found that the reporting quality of articles that used the STROBE statement for standardization was better than that of others [19,20,25,26]. Jacqueline Ramke et al used the STROBE statement to evaluate reporting in blindness prevalence surveys and found that the mean of the STROBE score of studies published in journals requiring the STROBE statement was higher than that for others [19].…”

Section: Summary Of Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The evaluation of the reporting quality of observational studies in Master of Public Health’s dissertations in China

Dai

Zhou

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Backgrounds Master of public health (MPH) plays an important role in Chinese medical education, and the dissertations is an important part of MPH education. In MPH dissertations, most are observational studies. Compared with randomized controlled trial (RCT), observational studies are more prone to information bias. So, the reporting of the observational studies should be transparent and standard. But, no research on evaluating the reporting quality of the MPH dissertation has been found.Methods A systematic literature search was performed in the Wanfang database from January 1, 2014 to May 31, 2019. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observation Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement was adopted to evaluate the reporting quality of the selected studies. Articles that met the following criteria were selected: (1) observational studies, including cross-sectional studies, case-control studies, and cohort studies; (2) original articles; (3) studies on humans, including both adults and children.Results The Median of compliance to individual STROBE items was 74.79%. The mean (standard deviation) of STROBE score was 14.29 (1.84). Five items/sub-items were 100% reported (“reported” and “partly reported” were combined): background, objectives, study design, report numbers of individuals at each stage, and key result. Fifteen items/sub-items were reported by 75% or more. Reporting of methods and results was often omitted: missing data (6.67%), sensitivity analyses (3.63%), flow diagram (15.15%), and absolute risk (0%). Logistic regression analysis indicated that cohort studies (OR=3.41, 95% CI=1.27-9.16), funding support (OR=4.37, 95% CI=1.27-9.16) and more published papers during postgraduate period (OR=3.46, 95% CI=1.40-8.60) were related to high reporting quality.Conclusion In short, the reporting quality of observational studies in MPH’s dissertations in China is suboptimal. However, it’s necessary to improve the reporting of method and results sections. We recommend that authors should be stricter to adhere STROBE statement when conducting observational studies.

show abstract

Quality of Reporting and Study Design of CKD Cohort Studies Assessing Mortality in the Elderly Before and After STROBE: A Systematic Review

Cited by 23 publications

References 45 publications

Development of a Quantitative Scoring Method for Strobe Checklist

Development of a Quantitative Scoring Method for Strobe Checklist

Evaluation of the reporting quality of observational studies in master of public health dissertations in China

The evaluation of the reporting quality of observational studies in Master of Public Health’s dissertations in China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About