Cargando…

Evaluation of the Quality of Reporting of Observational Studies in Otorhinolaryngology - Based on the STROBE Statement

BACKGROUND: Observational studies are the most frequently published studies in literature. When randomized controlled trials cannot be conducted because of ethical or practical considerations, an observational study design is the first choice. The STROBE Statement (STrengthening the Reporting of OBs...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hendriksma, Martine, Joosten, Michiel H. M. A., Peters, Jeroen P. M., Grolman, Wilko, Stegeman, Inge
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5217955/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28060869
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0169316
_version_ 1782492182948610048
author Hendriksma, Martine
Joosten, Michiel H. M. A.
Peters, Jeroen P. M.
Grolman, Wilko
Stegeman, Inge
author_facet Hendriksma, Martine
Joosten, Michiel H. M. A.
Peters, Jeroen P. M.
Grolman, Wilko
Stegeman, Inge
author_sort Hendriksma, Martine
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Observational studies are the most frequently published studies in literature. When randomized controlled trials cannot be conducted because of ethical or practical considerations, an observational study design is the first choice. The STROBE Statement (STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology) was developed to provide guidance on how to adequately report observational studies. OBJECTIVES: The objectives were 1) to evaluate the quality of reporting of observational studies of otorhinolaryngologic literature using the STROBE Statement checklist, 2) to compare the quality of reporting of observational studies in the top 5 Ear, Nose, Throat (ENT) journals versus the top 5 general medical journals and 3) to formulate recommendations to improve adequate reporting of observational research in otorhinolaryngologic literature. METHODS: The top 5 general medical journals and top 5 otorhinolaryngologic journals were selected based on their ISI Web of Knowledge impact factors. On August 3(rd), 2015, we performed a PubMed search using different filters to retrieve observational articles from these journals. Studies were selected from 2010 to 2014 for the general medical journals and from 2015 for the ENT journals. We assessed all STROBE items to examine how many items were reported adequately for each journal type. RESULTS: The articles in the top 5 general medical journals (n = 11) reported a mean of 69.2% (95% confidence interval (CI): 65.8%–72.7%; median 70.6%), whereas the top 5 ENT journals (n = 29) reported a mean of 51.4% (95% CI: 47.7%–55.0%; median 50.0%). The two journal types reported STROBE items significantly different (p < .001). CONCLUSION: Quality of reporting of observational studies in otorhinolaryngologic articles can considerably enhance. The quality of reporting was better in general medical journals compared to ENT journals. To improve the quality of reporting of observational studies, we recommend authors and editors to endorse and actively implement the STROBE Statement.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5217955
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-52179552017-01-19 Evaluation of the Quality of Reporting of Observational Studies in Otorhinolaryngology - Based on the STROBE Statement Hendriksma, Martine Joosten, Michiel H. M. A. Peters, Jeroen P. M. Grolman, Wilko Stegeman, Inge PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Observational studies are the most frequently published studies in literature. When randomized controlled trials cannot be conducted because of ethical or practical considerations, an observational study design is the first choice. The STROBE Statement (STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology) was developed to provide guidance on how to adequately report observational studies. OBJECTIVES: The objectives were 1) to evaluate the quality of reporting of observational studies of otorhinolaryngologic literature using the STROBE Statement checklist, 2) to compare the quality of reporting of observational studies in the top 5 Ear, Nose, Throat (ENT) journals versus the top 5 general medical journals and 3) to formulate recommendations to improve adequate reporting of observational research in otorhinolaryngologic literature. METHODS: The top 5 general medical journals and top 5 otorhinolaryngologic journals were selected based on their ISI Web of Knowledge impact factors. On August 3(rd), 2015, we performed a PubMed search using different filters to retrieve observational articles from these journals. Studies were selected from 2010 to 2014 for the general medical journals and from 2015 for the ENT journals. We assessed all STROBE items to examine how many items were reported adequately for each journal type. RESULTS: The articles in the top 5 general medical journals (n = 11) reported a mean of 69.2% (95% confidence interval (CI): 65.8%–72.7%; median 70.6%), whereas the top 5 ENT journals (n = 29) reported a mean of 51.4% (95% CI: 47.7%–55.0%; median 50.0%). The two journal types reported STROBE items significantly different (p < .001). CONCLUSION: Quality of reporting of observational studies in otorhinolaryngologic articles can considerably enhance. The quality of reporting was better in general medical journals compared to ENT journals. To improve the quality of reporting of observational studies, we recommend authors and editors to endorse and actively implement the STROBE Statement. Public Library of Science 2017-01-06 /pmc/articles/PMC5217955/ /pubmed/28060869 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0169316 Text en © 2017 Hendriksma et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Hendriksma, Martine
Joosten, Michiel H. M. A.
Peters, Jeroen P. M.
Grolman, Wilko
Stegeman, Inge
Evaluation of the Quality of Reporting of Observational Studies in Otorhinolaryngology - Based on the STROBE Statement
title Evaluation of the Quality of Reporting of Observational Studies in Otorhinolaryngology - Based on the STROBE Statement
title_full Evaluation of the Quality of Reporting of Observational Studies in Otorhinolaryngology - Based on the STROBE Statement
title_fullStr Evaluation of the Quality of Reporting of Observational Studies in Otorhinolaryngology - Based on the STROBE Statement
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of the Quality of Reporting of Observational Studies in Otorhinolaryngology - Based on the STROBE Statement
title_short Evaluation of the Quality of Reporting of Observational Studies in Otorhinolaryngology - Based on the STROBE Statement
title_sort evaluation of the quality of reporting of observational studies in otorhinolaryngology - based on the strobe statement
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5217955/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28060869
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0169316
work_keys_str_mv AT hendriksmamartine evaluationofthequalityofreportingofobservationalstudiesinotorhinolaryngologybasedonthestrobestatement
AT joostenmichielhma evaluationofthequalityofreportingofobservationalstudiesinotorhinolaryngologybasedonthestrobestatement
AT petersjeroenpm evaluationofthequalityofreportingofobservationalstudiesinotorhinolaryngologybasedonthestrobestatement
AT grolmanwilko evaluationofthequalityofreportingofobservationalstudiesinotorhinolaryngologybasedonthestrobestatement
AT stegemaninge evaluationofthequalityofreportingofobservationalstudiesinotorhinolaryngologybasedonthestrobestatement