Development of the Standards of Reporting of Neurological Disorders (STROND) checklist A guideline for the reporting of incidence and prevalence studies in neuroepidemiology
Development of the Standards of Reporting of Neurological Disorders (STROND) checklist A guideline for the reporting of incidence and prevalence studies in neuroepidemiology
复制标题
DOI：
10.1212/wnl.0000000000001866
复制
发表时间：
2015-09-01
期刊：
影响因子：
9.9
通讯作者：
Svenson, Lawrence W.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bennett, Derrick A.;Brayne, Carol;Svenson, Lawrence W.
背景：神经系统疾病的发病率和患病率研究在评估疾病负担和规划服务方面发挥着重要作用。然而，对疾病估计数的评估因此类研究报告方面的问题而受到阻碍。尽管发表的报告有所增加，但现有的指南涉及分析性而非描述性流行病学研究。也没有用户友好的工具（例如，目的：神经系统疾病报告标准（Standards of Reporting of Neurological Disorders，STROND）是一个由建议和检查表组成的指南，旨在促进更好地报告已发表的神经系统疾病的发病率和患病率研究。方法：对之前制定的指南进行审查，以生成神经病学发生率和患病率研究所需的项目列表。采用3轮德尔菲法确定对报告重要的“基本最小项目”，以及一些额外的“理想报告项目”。“然后使用电子咨询程序，以评估外部神经流行病学专家对清单中所列项目的适当性的意见。结果：在38个候选项目中，沿着了15个项目和相应的建议，以及用户友好的清单。结论：STROND检查表的引入和使用应导致更加一致、透明，描述性神经流行病学研究的情境化报告，导致更适用和可比的结果，并最终支持更好的医疗保健决策。
Background: Incidence and prevalence studies of neurologic disorders play an important role in assessing the burden of disease and planning services. However, the assessment of disease estimates is hindered by problems in reporting for such studies. Despite a growth in published reports, existing guidelines relate to analytical rather than descriptive epidemiologic studies. There are also no user-friendly tools (e.g., checklists) available for authors, editors, and peer reviewers to facilitate best practice in reporting of descriptive epidemiologic studies for most neurologic disorders.Objective: The Standards of Reporting of Neurological Disorders (STROND) is a guideline that consists of recommendations and a checklist to facilitate better reporting of published incidence and prevalence studies of neurologic disorders.Methods: A review of previously developed guidance was used to produce a list of items required for incidence and prevalence studies in neurology. A 3-round Delphi technique was used to identify the "basic minimum items" important for reporting, as well as some additional "ideal reporting items." An e-consultation process was then used in order to gauge opinion by external neuro-epidemiologic experts on the appropriateness of the items included in the checklist.Findings: Of 38 candidate items, 15 items and accompanying recommendations were developed along with a user-friendly checklist.Conclusions: The introduction and use of the STROND checklist should lead to more consistent, transparent, and contextualized reporting of descriptive neuroepidemiologic studies resulting in more applicable and comparable findings and ultimately support better health care decisions.