Cargando…

Evaluating the impact and use of Transparent Reporting of Evaluations with Non-randomised Designs (TREND) reporting guidelines

INTRODUCTION: Accurate and full reporting of evaluation of interventions in health research is needed for evidence synthesis and informed decision-making. Evidence suggests that biases and incomplete reporting affect the assessment of study validity and the ability to include this data in secondary...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fuller, Thomas, Pearson, Mark, Peters, Jaime L, Anderson, Rob
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Group 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3533093/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23257774
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002073
_version_ 1782254389689319424
author Fuller, Thomas
Pearson, Mark
Peters, Jaime L
Anderson, Rob
author_facet Fuller, Thomas
Pearson, Mark
Peters, Jaime L
Anderson, Rob
author_sort Fuller, Thomas
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Accurate and full reporting of evaluation of interventions in health research is needed for evidence synthesis and informed decision-making. Evidence suggests that biases and incomplete reporting affect the assessment of study validity and the ability to include this data in secondary research. The Transparent Reporting of Evaluations with Non-randomised Designs (TREND) reporting guideline was developed to improve the transparency and accuracy of the reporting of behavioural and public health evaluations with non-randomised designs. Evaluations of reporting guidelines have shown that they can be effective in improving reporting completeness. Although TREND occupies a niche within reporting guidelines, and despite it being 8 years since publication, no study yet has assessed its impact on reporting completeness or investigated what factors affect its use by authors and journal editors. This protocol describes two studies that aim to redress this. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Study 1 will use an observational design to examine the uptake and use of TREND by authors, and by journals in their instructions to authors. A comparison of reporting completeness and study quality of papers that do and do not use TREND to inform reporting will be made. Study 2 will use a cross-sectional survey to investigate what factors inhibit or facilitate authors’ and journal editors’ use of TREND. Semistructured interviews will also be conducted with a subset of authors and editors to explore findings from study 1 and the surveys in greater depth. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: These studies will generate evidence of how implementation and dissemination of the TREND guideline has affected reporting completeness in studies with experimental, non-randomised designs within behavioural and public health research. The project has received ethics approval from the Research Ethics Committee of the Peninsula College of Medicine and Dentistry, Universities of Exeter and Plymouth.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3533093
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher BMJ Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35330932013-01-04 Evaluating the impact and use of Transparent Reporting of Evaluations with Non-randomised Designs (TREND) reporting guidelines Fuller, Thomas Pearson, Mark Peters, Jaime L Anderson, Rob BMJ Open Public Health INTRODUCTION: Accurate and full reporting of evaluation of interventions in health research is needed for evidence synthesis and informed decision-making. Evidence suggests that biases and incomplete reporting affect the assessment of study validity and the ability to include this data in secondary research. The Transparent Reporting of Evaluations with Non-randomised Designs (TREND) reporting guideline was developed to improve the transparency and accuracy of the reporting of behavioural and public health evaluations with non-randomised designs. Evaluations of reporting guidelines have shown that they can be effective in improving reporting completeness. Although TREND occupies a niche within reporting guidelines, and despite it being 8 years since publication, no study yet has assessed its impact on reporting completeness or investigated what factors affect its use by authors and journal editors. This protocol describes two studies that aim to redress this. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Study 1 will use an observational design to examine the uptake and use of TREND by authors, and by journals in their instructions to authors. A comparison of reporting completeness and study quality of papers that do and do not use TREND to inform reporting will be made. Study 2 will use a cross-sectional survey to investigate what factors inhibit or facilitate authors’ and journal editors’ use of TREND. Semistructured interviews will also be conducted with a subset of authors and editors to explore findings from study 1 and the surveys in greater depth. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: These studies will generate evidence of how implementation and dissemination of the TREND guideline has affected reporting completeness in studies with experimental, non-randomised designs within behavioural and public health research. The project has received ethics approval from the Research Ethics Committee of the Peninsula College of Medicine and Dentistry, Universities of Exeter and Plymouth. BMJ Group 2012-12-19 /pmc/articles/PMC3533093/ /pubmed/23257774 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002073 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non commercial and is otherwise in compliance with the license. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/ and http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/legalcode.
spellingShingle Public Health
Fuller, Thomas
Pearson, Mark
Peters, Jaime L
Anderson, Rob
Evaluating the impact and use of Transparent Reporting of Evaluations with Non-randomised Designs (TREND) reporting guidelines
title Evaluating the impact and use of Transparent Reporting of Evaluations with Non-randomised Designs (TREND) reporting guidelines
title_full Evaluating the impact and use of Transparent Reporting of Evaluations with Non-randomised Designs (TREND) reporting guidelines
title_fullStr Evaluating the impact and use of Transparent Reporting of Evaluations with Non-randomised Designs (TREND) reporting guidelines
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating the impact and use of Transparent Reporting of Evaluations with Non-randomised Designs (TREND) reporting guidelines
title_short Evaluating the impact and use of Transparent Reporting of Evaluations with Non-randomised Designs (TREND) reporting guidelines
title_sort evaluating the impact and use of transparent reporting of evaluations with non-randomised designs (trend) reporting guidelines
topic Public Health
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3533093/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23257774
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002073
work_keys_str_mv AT fullerthomas evaluatingtheimpactanduseoftransparentreportingofevaluationswithnonrandomiseddesignstrendreportingguidelines
AT pearsonmark evaluatingtheimpactanduseoftransparentreportingofevaluationswithnonrandomiseddesignstrendreportingguidelines
AT petersjaimel evaluatingtheimpactanduseoftransparentreportingofevaluationswithnonrandomiseddesignstrendreportingguidelines
AT andersonrob evaluatingtheimpactanduseoftransparentreportingofevaluationswithnonrandomiseddesignstrendreportingguidelines