Use of reporting guidelines in scientific writing: PRISMA, CONSORT, STROBE, STARD and other resources

Brain Impairment

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 2-21

  Tate, Robyn L ^a   Douglas, Jacinta ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^b LA TROBE UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Clinical trials; CONSORT; Method quality rating scales; N of 1 trials; Observational studies; Qualitative research; Reporting guidelines; Single subject designs

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; EDITORIAL; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; EXTERNAL BIAS; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROFESSIONAL STANDARD; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; QUALITY CONTROL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RATING SCALE; RISK ASSESSMENT; SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE; SCIENTIFIC WRITING; STUDY DESIGN; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); VOLUNTARY REPORTING; WRITING;

EID: 79960472242     PISSN: 14439646     EISSN: 18395252     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1375/brim.12.1.1     Document Type: Editorial

References (49)

1. Bossuyt, P.M., Reitsma, J.B., Bruns, D.E., Gatsonis, C.A., Glasziou, P.P., Irwig, L.M., ... de Vet, H.C.W. (2003a). Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The STARD Initiative. Clinical Chemistry, 49(1), 1-6.
2. Bossuyt, P.M., Reitsma, J.B., Bruns, D.E., Gatsonis, C.A., Glasziou, P.P., Irwug, L.M., ... Lijmer, J.G. (2003b). The STARD statement for reporting studies of diagnostic accuracy: Explanation and elaboration. Clinical Chemistry, 49(1), 7-18.
3. Boutron, I., Moher, D., Altman, D.G., Schulz, K.F., Ravaud, P., for the CONSORT Group. (2008). Extending the CONSORT Statement to randomized trials of nonpharmacologic treatment: Explanation and elaboration. Annals of Internal Medicine, 148, 295-309.
4. Boutron, I., Moher, D., Tugwell, P., Giraudeau, B., Poiraudeau, S., Nizard, R., & Ravaud P. (2005). A checklist to evaluate a report of a nonpharmacological trial (CLEAR NPT) was developed under consensus. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 58, 1233-1240.
5. Clark, J.P. (2003). How to peer review a qualitative manuscript. In F. Godlee & T. Jefferson (Eds.) Peer Review in Health Sciences (2nd ed., pp. 219-235). London: BMJ Books.
6. Cohen, D., &Crabtree, B. (2006). Qualitative Research Guidelines Project. Retrieved from http://www.qualres.org/index.html.
7. Cohen, D., & Crabtree, B. (2008). Evaluative criteria for qualitative research in health care: controversies and recommendations. Annals of Family Medicine, 6, 331-339.
8. Deeks, J.J. (2001). Systematic reviews in health care: Systematic reviews of evaluations of diagnostic and screening tests. British Medical Journal, 323, 157-162.
9. Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S. (1994). Handbook of qualitative research, Thousand Oaks: Sage.
10. Dijkers, M. (2009). The value of 'traditional' reviews in the era or systematic reviews. American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 88, 423-430.
11. Dijkers, M., Kropp, G.C., Esper, R.M., Yavuzer, G., Cullen, N., & Bakdalieh, Y. (2002). Quality of intervention research reporting in medical rehabilitation journals. American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 81, 21-33.
12. Dixon-Woods, M., Sutton, A., Shaw, R., Miller, T., Smith, J., & Young, B. (2007). Appraising qualitative research for inclusion in systematic reviews: A quantitative and qualitative comparison of three methods. Journal of Health Service Research and Policy, 12, 42-7.
13. Downs, S.H., & Black, N. (1998). The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 52, 377-384.
14. Guyatt, G., Sackett, D., Taylor, R.W., Chong, J., Roberts, R., & Pugsley, S. (1986). Determining optimal therapy - randomised trials in individual patients. The New England Journal of Medicine, 314(14), 889-892.
15. Hopewell, S., Clarke, M., Moher, D., Wager, E., Middleton, P., Altman, D.G. ... CONSORT Group. (2004). CONSORT for reporting randomised rials in journal and conference abstracts. Lancet, 371, 281-283.
16. Hopewell, S., Dutton, S., Yu, L.M., Chan, A.W., & Altman, D.G. (2010). The quality of reports of randomized trials in 2000 and 2006: Comparative study of articles indexed in PubMed. British Medical Journal, 340, 1-8.
17. Howick, J., Chalmers, I., Glasziou, P., Greenhaigh, T., Heneghan, C., Liberati, A., ... Thornton, H. (2011). The 2011 Oxford CEBM evidence table (introductory document). Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. Retrieved from http://www.cebm.net/index.aspx?o=5653
18. Ioannidis, J.P.A., Evans, S.J.W., Gøtzsche, P.C., O'Neil, R.T., Altman, D.G., Schulz, K., Moher, D., for the CONSORT Group. (2004). Better reporting of harms in randomized trials: An extension of the CONSORT Statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 141(10), 781-788; W-147 to W-151.
19. Kazdin, A.E. (2011). Single-case research designs. Methods for clinical and applied settings (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
20. Liberati, A., Altman, D.G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Getzsche, P.C., Ioannidis, J.P.A., ... Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), 1-28.
21. Maas, A.I.R., Steyerberg, E.W., Marmarou, A., McHugh, G.S., Lingsma, H.R., Butcher, I., ... Murray, G.D. (2010). IMPACT recommendatios for improving the design and analysis of clinical trials in moderate to severe traumatic brain injury. Neurotherapeutics, 7, 127-134.
22. Maher, C.G., Sherrington, C., Herbert, R.D., Moseley, A.M., & Elkins, M. (2003). Reliability of the PEDro scale for rating quality of RCTs. Physical Therapy, 83, 713-721.
23. Malterud, K. (2001). Qualitative research: standards, challenges and guidelines. The Lancet, 358, 483-488.
24. Mann, R., Hewitt, C.E., Gilbody, S.M. (2009). Assessing the quality of diagnostic studies using psychometric instruments: Applying QUADAS. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 44, 300-307.
25. Mays, N., & Pope, C. (2000). Qualitative research in health care: Assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ, 320, 50-52.
26. Moher, D., Cook, D.J., Eastwood, S., Olkin, I., Rennie, D., & Stroup, D.F. (1999). Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials. The QUOROM statement: Quality of reporting of meta-analyses. Lancet, 354, 1896-1900.
27. Moher, D., Hopewell, S., Schulz, K.F., Montori, V., Gøzsche, P.C., Devereaux, P.J., ... Altman, D.G. (2010). CONSORT 2010 Explanation and elaboration: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(8), e1-e37.
28. Moher, D., Jadad, A.R., Nichol, G., Penman, M., Tugwell, P., & Walsh, S. (1995). Assessing the quality of randomised controlled trials: An annotated biography of scales and checklists. Controlled Clinical Trials, 16, 62-73.
29. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D.G., the PRISMA Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097.
30. Noyes, J., Popay, J., Pearson, A., Hannes, K., & Booth, A. (2011). Qualitative research and Cochrane reviews. In J.P.T. Higgins & S. Green (Eds.), Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration. Retrieved from www.cochrane-handbook.org.
31. Pearson, A. (2003). Balancing the evidence: Incorporating the synthesis of qualitative data into systematic reviews. JBI Reports, 1, 3.
32. Perdices, M., & Tate, R.L. (2009). Single-subject designs as a tool for evidence-based clinical practice: are they unrecognised and undervalued? Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 19(6), 904-927.
33. Reitsma, J.B., Rutjes, A.W. S., Whiting, P., Vlassov, V.V., Leeflang, M.M.G., Deeks, J.J. (2009). Assessing methodological quality. In J.J. Deeks, P.M. Bossuyt & C. Gatsonis (Eds.), Cochrane handbook of systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy (Version 1.0.0). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2009. Retrieved from http//srdta.cochrane.org
34. Shea, B.J., Bouter, L.M., Peterson, J., Boers, M., Andersson, N., Ortiz, Z., & Grimshaw, J.M. (2007). External validation of a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR). PLoS ONE, 12, e1350.
35. Shea, B.J., Grimshaw, J.M., Wells, G.A., Boers, M., Andersson, N., Hamel, C., ... Bouter, L.M. (2007). Development of AMSTAR: A measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology,7(10).
36. Shultz, K.F., Chalmers, I., Hayes, R.J., & Altman, D.G. (1995). Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. Journal of the American Medical Association, 273, 408-412.
37. Schulz, K.F., Altman, D.G., Moher, D., for the CONSORT Group. (2010). CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. Annals of Internal Medicine, 152(11), 1-11.
38. Smidt, N., Rutjes, A.W.S., van der Windt, D.A.W.M., Ostelo, R.W.J.G., Bossuyt, P.M., Reitsma, J.B., ... De Vet, H.C.W. (2006). Reproducibility of the STARD checklist: An instrument to assess the quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 6(12). doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-6-12.
39. Spencer, L., Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., & Dillon, L. (2003). Quality in qualitative evaluation: A framework for assessing research evidence. London: Government Chief Social Researcher's Office.
40. Streiner, D. (2003). Diagnosing tests: Using and misusing diagnostic and screening tests. Journal of Personality Assessment, 81(3), 210-219.
41. Stroup, D.F., Berlin, J.A., Morton, S.C., Olkin, I., Wilkinson, G.D., Rennie, D., ... Thacker, S.B. (2000). Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: A proposal for reporting. Meta- Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) Group. Journal of the American Medical Association, 283(15), 2008-2012.
42. Tate, R.L., McDonald, S., Perdices, M., Togher, L., Schultz, R., & Savage, S. (2008). Rating the methodological quality of single-subject designs and n-of-1 trials: Introducing the Single-case Experimental Design (SCED) Scale. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 18(4), 385-401.
43. Tong, A., Sainsbury, P., & Craig, J. (2007). Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): A 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 19(6), 349-357.
44. Vandenbroucke, J.P., von Elm, E., Altman, D.G., Gøtzsche, P.C., Mulrow, C.D., Pocock, S.J., ... Egger, M. (2007). Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and elaboration. Annals of Internal Medicine, 147(8), W163-W194.
45. von Elm, E., Altman, D.G., Egger, M., Pocock, S.J., Gøtzsche, P.C., Vandenbroucke, J.P., for the STROBE Initiative. (2007). The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: Guidelines for reporting observational studies. The Lancet, 370, 1453-1457.
46. Walsh, D., & Downe, S. (2006). Appraising the quality of qualitative research. Midwifery, 22, 108-119.
47. Whiting, P., Rutjes, A.W. S., Reitsma, J.B., Bossuyt, P.M. M., & Kleijnen, J. (2003). The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 3(25). Retrieved from: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/3/25.
48. Whiting, P.F., Weswood, M.E., Rutjes, A.W. S., Reitsma, J.B., Bossuyt, P.N. M., & Kleijnen, J. (2006). Evaluation of QUADAS, a tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 6(9). doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-6-9.
49. Wilson, B. (1987). Single-case experimental designs in neuropsychological rehabilitation. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 9(5), 527-544.