A systematic scoping review of adherence to reporting guidelines in health care literature.
A systematic scoping review of adherence to reporting guidelines in health care literature.
复制标题
DOI：
10.2147/jmdh.s43952
复制
发表时间：
2013
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Thabane L
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Samaan Z;Mbuagbaw L;Kosa D;Borg Debono V;Dillenburg R;Zhang S;Fruci V;Dennis B;Bawor M;Thabane L
自1996年《报告试验综合标准》声明发布以来，报告准则已经存在了17年。制定这些指南的目的是提高医学文献中研究报告的质量。尽管这些指南广泛可用，但医学文献的报告质量仍然不理想。在这项研究中，我们评估了目前遵守报告指南的做法;确定与更好地遵守这些指南相关的关键因素;并为未来的研究提供建议，以加强遵守报告指南。我们对不同临床领域和研究设计中遵守报告指南的系统评价进行了系统范围审查。我们检索了1996年1月至2012年9月的4个电子数据库（护理和相关健康文献累积索引、Web of Science、Embase和Medline）。如果研究涉及遵守以下指南之一，则纳入研究：试验报告统一标准（CONSORT）、系统综述和荟萃分析的首选报告项目（PRISMA）、荟萃分析报告质量（QUOROM）、非随机设计评价的透明报告（TREND），流行病学观察性研究荟萃分析（MOOSE）和加强流行病学观察性研究报告（STROBE）。为这项研究设计了一个方案。文献检索、数据提取和质量评估由两名作者独立进行，一式两份。本研究报告遵循PRISMA指南。我们的检索检索到5159个标题，其中50个符合条件。总体而言，86.0%的研究报告了报告指南依从性的次优水平。与更好的依从性相关的因素包括期刊影响因子和指南的认可、出版日期、资金来源、多地点研究、药物干预和更大规模的研究。临床文献中的报告指南对于提高临床研究的报告标准非常重要;然而，遵守这些指南仍然不是最佳的。因此，需要采取行动加强对这些标准的遵守。提高依从性的策略包括认可这些指南的期刊编辑政策。
Reporting guidelines have been available for the past 17 years since the inception of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement in 1996. These guidelines were developed to improve the quality of reporting of studies in medical literature. Despite the widespread availability of these guidelines, the quality of reporting of medical literature remained suboptimal. In this study, we assess the current adherence practice to reporting guidelines; determine key factors associated with better adherence to these guidelines; and provide recommendations to enhance adherence to reporting guidelines for future studies. We undertook a systematic scoping review of systematic reviews of adherence to reporting guidelines across different clinical areas and study designs. We searched four electronic databases (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Web of Science, Embase, and Medline) from January 1996 to September 2012. Studies were included if they addressed adherence to one of the following guidelines: Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT), Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), Quality of Reporting of Meta-analysis (QUOROM), Transparent Reporting of Evaluations with Nonrandomized Designs (TREND), Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) and Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE). A protocol for this study was devised. A literature search, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed independently by two authors in duplicate. This study reporting follows the PRISMA guidelines. Our search retrieved 5159 titles, of which 50 were eligible. Overall, 86.0% of studies reported suboptimal levels of adherence to reporting guidelines. Factors associated with better adherence included journal impact factor and endorsement of guidelines, publication date, funding source, multisite studies, pharmacological interventions and larger studies. Reporting guidelines in the clinical literature are important to improve the standards of reporting of clinical studies; however, adherence to these guidelines remains suboptimal. Action is therefore needed to enhance the adherence to these standards. Strategies to enhance adherence include journal editorial policies endorsing these guidelines.