Search

Objective: Reporting research is as important a part of a study as its design or analysis. Reporting guidelines (RGs) provide structured advice on how to report research studies clearly and adequately. This study aimed to review the development of RGs of Chinese medicine (CM) and to provide recommendations for improvement. Methods: Through a systematic search of the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) Network and electronic databases up to January 1, 2022, we identified a total of 15 RGs of CM, and further summarized their characteristics and applications. In addition, we reviewed the development of international RGs and analyzed its impact for CM. Results: Compared with the generic RGs, the reporting standards of CM have been rapidly developed over the last 10 years, of which 57% were issued in recent 3 years (2019–2021). Currently, the system of RGs of CM has been established, especially for clinical trials, including various CM interventions and covering the guidelines from trial registration, protocol, results publication to the evidence synthesis and clinical practice guideline. However, the application of RGs of CM is suboptimal. Conclusion: It is necessary to take further measures to promote practical application, improve journals’ endorsement, and establish quality monitoring procedures for RGs of CM in the future.

Objectives: The aim of this study is to identify available reporting guidelines for traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), delineate their fundamental characteristics, assess the scientific rigor of their development process, and evaluate their dissemination., Study Design and Setting: A search was conducted in Medline (via PubMed), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), SinoMed, WANFANG DATA, and the EQUATOR Network to identify TCM reporting guidelines. A preprepared Excel database was used to extract information on the basic characteristics, development process, and dissemination information. The development process quality of TCM reporting guidelines was assessed by evaluating their compliance with the Guidance for Developers of Health Research Reporting Guidelines (GDHRRG). The extent of dissemination of these guidelines was analyzed by examining the number of citations received., Results: A total of 26 reporting guidelines for TCM were obtained from 20 academic journals, with 61.5% of them published in English journals. Among the guidelines, 14 (53.8%) were registered in the EQUATOR Network. On average, the compliance rate of GDHRRG guidelines was reported to be 63.3% ranging from 22.2% to 94.4%. Three steps showed poor compliance, namely guideline endorsement (23.1%), translated guidelines (19.2%), and developing a publication strategy (19.2%). Furthermore, the compliance rate of GDHRRG guidelines published in English journals was higher than that in Chinese journals. In terms of the dissemination, 15.4% of the guidelines had been cited over 100 times, while 73.1% had been cited less than 50 times., Conclusion: The development of TCM reporting guidelines still has limitations in terms of regarding scientific rigor and follow-up dissemination. Therefore, it is important to ensure adherence to the scientific process in the development of TCM reporting guidelines and to strengthen their promotion, dissemination, and implementation., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To investigate scientific collaboration and citation metrics of reporting guidelines for health research., Study Design and Setting: A cross-sectional analysis of published articles of reporting guidelines for health research. A search of the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network Library (from inception to January 21, 2021) was supplemented by searching websites of guideline developers. For each article, metadata (e.g., authors, institutions, countries, citations) were extracted from the Web of Science and Scopus (up to October 25, 2021). Descriptive analyses were conducted. Network analyses of collaborations were presented., Results: We included 662 articles published in 332 journals. The BMJ (n = 50 articles; 8%), Annals of Internal Medicine (n = 29; 4%), and Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (n = 24; 4%) published the largest number of articles. Four thousand seven hundred twenty two authors, 1,647 institutions, and 83 countries were involved. The global productivity was led by the United States (n = 456 articles), the United Kingdom (n = 414), and Canada (n = 306). We found eight clusters of authors (e.g., one major group with 337 members) and three clusters of institutions (e.g., one major group with 256 members). The most prolific authors were affiliated with the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (Canada), the University of Ottawa (Canada), the University of Oxford (the United Kingdom), and Stanford University (the United States)., Conclusion: Our analysis identified key actors producing reporting guidelines, most intense collaborations, and 'citation classics' in the field. These results could potentially be used to strengthen collaborations for developing and disseminating reporting guidelines for health research., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Well-written and transparent case reports (1) reveal early signals of potential benefits, harms, and information on the use of resources; (2) provide information for clinical research and clinical practice guidelines, and (3) inform medical education. High-quality case reports are more likely when authors follow reporting guidelines. During 2011-2012, a group of clinicians, researchers, and journal editors developed recommendations for the accurate reporting of information in case reports that resulted in the CARE (CAse REport) Statement and Checklist. They were presented at the 2013 International Congress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication, have been endorsed by multiple medical journals, and translated into nine languages., Objectives: This explanation and elaboration document has the objective to increase the use and dissemination of the CARE Checklist in writing and publishing case reports., Article Design and Setting: Each item from the CARE Checklist is explained and accompanied by published examples. The explanations and examples in this document are designed to support the writing of high-quality case reports by authors and their critical appraisal by editors, peer reviewers, and readers., Results and Conclusion: This article and the 2013 CARE Statement and Checklist, available from the CARE website [www.care-statement.org] and the EQUATOR Network [www.equator-network.org], are resources for improving the completeness and transparency of case reports., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Informative journal abstracts are crucial for the identification and initial appraisal of studies. We aimed to evaluate the informativeness of abstracts of diagnostic accuracy studies., Study Design and Setting: PubMed was searched for reports of studies that had evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of a test against a clinical reference standard, published in 12 high-impact journals in 2012. Two reviewers independently evaluated the information contained in included abstracts using 21 items deemed important based on published guidance for adequate reporting and study quality assessment., Results: We included 103 abstracts. Crucial information on study population, setting, patient sampling, and blinding as well as confidence intervals around accuracy estimates were reported in <50% of the abstracts. The mean number of reported items per abstract was 10.1 of 21 (standard deviation 2.2). The mean number of reported items was significantly lower for multiple-gate (case-control type) studies, in reports in specialty journals, and for studies with smaller sample sizes and lower abstract word counts. No significant differences were found between studies evaluating different types of tests., Conclusion: Many abstracts of diagnostic accuracy study reports in high-impact journals are insufficiently informative. Developing guidelines for such abstracts could help the transparency and completeness of reporting., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: A case report is a narrative that describes, for medical, scientific, or educational purposes, a medical problem experienced by one or more patients. Case reports written without guidance from reporting standards are insufficiently rigorous to guide clinical practice or to inform clinical study design., Primary Objective: Develop, disseminate, and implement systematic reporting guidelines for case reports., Methods: We used a three-phase consensus process consisting of (1) pre-meeting literature review and interviews to generate items for the reporting guidelines, (2) a face-to-face consensus meeting to draft the reporting guidelines, and (3) post-meeting feedback, review, and pilot testing, followed by finalization of the case report guidelines., Results: This consensus process involved 27 participants and resulted in a 13-item checklist-a reporting guideline for case reports. The primary items of the checklist are title, key words, abstract, introduction, patient information, clinical findings, timeline, diagnostic assessment, therapeutic interventions, follow-up and outcomes, discussion, patient perspective, and informed consent., Conclusions: We believe the implementation of the CARE (CAse REport) guidelines by medical journals will improve the completeness and transparency of published case reports and that the systematic aggregation of information from case reports will inform clinical study design, provide early signals of effectiveness and harms, and improve healthcare delivery., (Copyright © 2014 Reproduced with permission of Global Advances in Health and Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)