scholarly journals Quality of Cohort Studies Reporting Post the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement

2011 ◽  
Vol 33 ◽  
pp. e2011005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jalal Poorolajal ◽  
Zahra Cheraghi ◽  
Amin Doosti Irani ◽  
Shahab Rezaeian
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Strobe Statement

scholarly journals The evaluation of the reporting quality of observational studies in Master of Public Health’s dissertations in China

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
ShuangYang Dai ◽  
Xiaobin Zhou ◽  
Hong Xu ◽  
Beibei Li ◽  
JinGao Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Absolute Risk ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Flow Diagram ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Strobe Statement

Abstract Backgrounds Master of public health (MPH) plays an important role in Chinese medical education, and the dissertations is an important part of MPH education. In MPH dissertations, most are observational studies. Compared with randomized controlled trial (RCT), observational studies are more prone to information bias. So, the reporting of the observational studies should be transparent and standard. But, no research on evaluating the reporting quality of the MPH dissertation has been found.Methods A systematic literature search was performed in the Wanfang database from January 1, 2014 to May 31, 2019. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observation Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement was adopted to evaluate the reporting quality of the selected studies. Articles that met the following criteria were selected: (1) observational studies, including cross-sectional studies, case-control studies, and cohort studies; (2) original articles; (3) studies on humans, including both adults and children.Results The Median of compliance to individual STROBE items was 74.79%. The mean (standard deviation) of STROBE score was 14.29 (1.84). Five items/sub-items were 100% reported (“reported” and “partly reported” were combined): background, objectives, study design, report numbers of individuals at each stage, and key result. Fifteen items/sub-items were reported by 75% or more. Reporting of methods and results was often omitted: missing data (6.67%), sensitivity analyses (3.63%), flow diagram (15.15%), and absolute risk (0%). Logistic regression analysis indicated that cohort studies (OR=3.41, 95% CI=1.27-9.16), funding support (OR=4.37, 95% CI=1.27-9.16) and more published papers during postgraduate period (OR=3.46, 95% CI=1.40-8.60) were related to high reporting quality.Conclusion In short, the reporting quality of observational studies in MPH’s dissertations in China is suboptimal. However, it’s necessary to improve the reporting of method and results sections. We recommend that authors should be stricter to adhere STROBE statement when conducting observational studies.

scholarly journals The evaluation of the reporting quality of observational studies in Master of Public Health’s dissertations in China

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
ShuangYang Dai ◽  
Xiaobin Zhou ◽  
Hong Xu ◽  
Beibei Li ◽  
JinGao Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Absolute Risk ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Flow Diagram ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Strobe Statement

Abstract Backgrounds Master of public health (MPH) plays an important role in Chinese medical education, and the dissertations is an important part of MPH education. In MPH dissertations, most are observational studies. Compared with randomized controlled trial (RCT), observational studies are more prone to information bias. So, the reporting of the observational studies should be transparent and standard. But, no research on evaluating the reporting quality of the MPH dissertation has been found. Methods A systematic literature search was performed in the Wanfang database from January 1, 2014 to May 31, 2019. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observation Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement was adopted to evaluate the reporting quality of the selected studies. Articles that met the following criteria were selected: (1) observational studies, including cross-sectional studies, case-control studies, and cohort studies; (2) original articles; (3) studies on humans, including both adults and children. Results The Median of compliance to individual STROBE items was 74.79%. The mean (standard deviation) of STROBE score was 14.29 (1.84). Five items/sub-items were 100% reported (“reported” and “partly reported” were combined): background, objectives, study design, report numbers of individuals at each stage, and key result. Fifteen items/sub-items were reported by 75% or more. Reporting of methods and results was often omitted: missing data (6.67%), sensitivity analyses (3.63%), flow diagram (15.15%), and absolute risk (0%). Logistic regression analysis indicated that cohort studies (OR=3.41, 95% CI=1.27-9.16), funding support (OR=4.37, 95% CI=1.27-9.16) and more published papers during postgraduate period (OR=3.46, 95% CI=1.40-8.60) were related to high reporting quality. Conclusion In short, the reporting quality of observational studies in MPH’s dissertations in China is suboptimal. However, it’s necessary to improve the reporting of method and results sections. We recommend that authors should be stricter to adhere STROBE statement when conducting observational studies.

scholarly journals Evaluation of the reporting quality of observational studies in master of public health dissertations in China

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shuangyang Dai ◽  
Xiaobin Zhou ◽  
Hong Xu ◽  
Beibei Li ◽  
Jingao Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Absolute Risk ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Flow Diagram ◽  
Master Of Public Health ◽  
Strobe Statement

Abstract Backgrounds Master of public health (MPH) plays an important role in Chinese medical education, and the dissertations is an important part of MPH education. In MPH dissertations, most are observational studies. Compared with randomized controlled trial (RCT), observational studies are more prone to information bias. So, the reporting of the observational studies should be transparent and standard. But, no research on evaluating the reporting quality of the MPH dissertation has been found. Methods A systematic literature search was performed in the Wanfang database from January 1, 2014 to May 31, 2019. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observation Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement was adopted to evaluate the reporting quality of the selected studies. Articles that met the following criteria were selected: (1) observational studies, including cross-sectional studies, case-control studies, and cohort studies; (2) original articles; (3) studies on humans, including both adults and children. Results The Median of compliance to individual STROBE items was 74.79%. The mean (standard deviation) of STROBE score was 14.29 (1.84). Five items/sub-items were 100% reported (“reported” and “partly reported” were combined): background, objectives, study design, report numbers of individuals at each stage, and key result. Fifteen items/sub-items were reported by 75% or more. Reporting of methods and results was often omitted: missing data (6.67%), sensitivity analyses (3.63%), flow diagram (15.15%), and absolute risk (0%). Logistic regression analysis indicated that cohort studies (OR = 3.41, 95% CI = 1.27–9.16), funding support (OR = 4.37, 95% CI = 1.27–9.16) and more published papers during postgraduate period (OR = 3.46, 95% CI = 1.40–8.60) were related to high reporting quality. Conclusion In short, the reporting quality of observational studies in MPH’s dissertations in China is suboptimal. However, it’s necessary to improve the reporting of method and results sections. We recommend that authors should be stricter to adhere STROBE statement when conducting observational studies.

scholarly journals The evaluation of the reporting quality of observational studies in Master of Public Health’s dissertations in China

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
ShuangYang Dai ◽  
Xiaobin Zhou ◽  
Hong Xu ◽  
Beibei Li ◽  
JinGao Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Absolute Risk ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Flow Diagram ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Strobe Statement

Abstract Backgrounds Master of public health (MPH) plays an important role in Chinese medical education, and the dissertations is an important part of MPH education. In MPH dissertations, most are observational studies. Compared with randomized controlled trial (RCT), observational studies are more prone to information bias. So, the reporting of the observational studies should be transparent and standard. But, no research on evaluating the reporting quality of the MPH dissertation has been found. Methods A systematic literature search was performed in the Wanfang database from January 1, 2014 to May 31, 2019. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observation Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement was adopted to evaluate the reporting quality of the selected studies. Articles that met the following criteria were selected: (1) observational studies, including cross-sectional studies, case-control studies, and cohort studies; (2) original articles; (3) studies on humans, including both adults and children. Results The Median of compliance to individual STROBE items was 74.79%. The mean (standard deviation) of STROBE score was 14.29 (1.84). Five items/sub-items were 100% reported (“reported” and “partly reported” were combined): background, objectives, study design, report numbers of individuals at each stage, and key result. Fifteen items/sub-items were reported by 75% or more. Reporting of methods and results was often omitted: missing data (6.67%), sensitivity analyses (3.63%), flow diagram (15.15%), and absolute risk (0%). Logistic regression analysis indicated that cohort studies (OR=3.41, 95% CI=1.27-9.16), funding support (OR=4.37, 95% CI=1.27-9.16) and more published papers during postgraduate period (OR=3.46, 95% CI=1.40-8.60) were related to high reporting quality. Conclusion In short, the reporting quality of observational studies in MPH’s dissertations in China is suboptimal. However, it’s necessary to improve the reporting of method and results sections. We recommend that authors should be stricter to adhere STROBE statement when conducting observational studies.

scholarly journals Evaluation of the reporting quality of observational studies in Master of Public Health’s dissertations in China: a systematic review

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
ShuangYang Dai ◽  
Xiaobin Zhou ◽  
Hong Xu ◽  
Beibei Li ◽  
JinGao Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Observational Studies ◽  
Absolute Risk ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Flow Diagram ◽  
Master Of Public Health ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Strobe Statement

Abstract Backgrounds Master of public health (MPH) plays an important role in Chinese medical education, and the dissertations is an important part of MPH education. In MPH dissertations, most are observational studies. Compared with randomized controlled trial (RCT), observational studies are more prone to information bias. So, the reporting of the observational studies should be transparent and standard. But, no research on evaluating the reporting quality of the MPH dissertation has been found. Methods A systematic literature search was performed in the Wanfang database from January 1, 2014 to May 31, 2019. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observation Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement was adopted to evaluate the reporting quality of the selected studies. Results The median of compliance with STROBE statement of 165 articles was 67.82%. The mean (standard deviation) of STROBE score was 14.3 (1.91). Five items/sub-items were 100% reported: background, objectives, study design, report numbers of individuals at each stage, and key result. Fifteen items/sub-items were reported by 75% or more. Reporting of methods and results was often omitted: missing data (12.73%), sensitivity analyses (3.03%), flow diagram (15.15%), and absolute risk (0%). Logistic regression analysis indicated that funding support (OR=13.98, 95% CI=4.37-44.70) and more published papers during postgraduate period (OR=2.77, 95% CI=1.02-7.54) were related to high reporting quality. Conclusion In short, the reporting quality of observational studies in MPH’s dissertations in China is suboptimal. However, it’s necessary to improve the reporting of method and results sections. We recommend that authors should be stricter to adhere STROBE statement when conducting observational studies.

scholarly journals Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and Elaboration. Translation to Russian

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Jan P. Vandenbroucke ◽  
Erik Von Elm ◽  
Douglas G. Altman ◽  
Peter C. Gotzsche ◽  
Cynthia D. Mulrow ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Observational Studies ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Observational Research ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Quality Of Reporting ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Useful Flow ◽  
Study Designs ◽  
Strobe Statement

Much medical research is observational. The reporting of observational studies is often of insufficient quality. Poor reporting hampers the assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of a study and the generalisability of its results. Taking into account empirical evidence and theoretical considerations, a group of methodologists, researchers, and editors developed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) recommendations to improve the quality of reporting of observational studies. The STROBE Statement consists of a checklist of 22 items, which relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results and discussion sections of articles. Eighteen items are common to cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies and four are specific to each of the three study designs. The STROBE Statement provides guidance to authors about how to improve the reporting of observational studies and facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of studies by reviewers, journal editors and readers. This explanatory and elaboration document is intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the STROBE Statement. The meaning and rationale for each checklist item are presented. For each item, one or several published examples and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature are provided. Examples of useful flow diagrams are also included. The STROBE Statement, this document, and the associated Web site (http://www. strobe-statement.org/) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of observational research. This article is the reprint with Russian translation of the original that can be observed here: Vandenbroucke JP, von Elm E, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC, Mulrow CD, et al. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and Elaboration. PLoS Med 2007;4(10):e297. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040297

scholarly journals Evidence-Based Medicine, Systematic Reviews, and Guidelines in Interventional Pain Management: Part 4: Observational Studies

2009 ◽  
Vol 1;12 (1;1) ◽  
pp. 73-108 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Medical Research ◽  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Randomized Trials ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Cross Sectional Studies ◽  
Based Medicine ◽  
Strobe Statement

Evidence-based medicine (EBM) stresses the examination of evidence from clinical research and describes it as a shift in medical paradigms, in contrast to intuition, unsystematic clinical experience, and pathophysiologic rationale. While the importance of randomized trials has been created by the concept of the hierarchy of evidence in guiding therapy, much of the medical research is observational. There is competition, contrast, and a feeling of inferiority and uselessness for observational studies, created by a lack of understanding of medical research. However, observational studies and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) can be viewed as the steps of observation and experimentation that form the basis of the scientific methodology. Further, rational healthcare practices require knowledge about the etiology and pathogenesis, diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of disorders. The reporting of observational research is often not detailed and clear enough with insufficient quality and poor reporting, which hampers the assessment of strengths and weaknesses of the study and the generalizability of the mixed results. Thus, design, implementation, and reporting of observational studies is crucial. The biased interpretation of results from observational studies, either in favor of or opposed to a treatment, and lack of proper understanding of observational studies, leads to a poor appraisal of the quality. Similar to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement for the reporting of randomized trials, the Strengthening of the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement was developed with recommendations to improve the quality of reporting observational studies. The STROBE statement consists of a checklist of 22 items, which relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of articles. Multiple types of observational studies are conducted; however, 3 types have been highlighted in the STROBE document and also in the present review, which include cohort studies, case-controlled studies, and cross-sectional studies. This comprehensive review provides an introduction and rationale, types, design, and reporting of observational studies; outcomes assessment and data presentation and analysis; statistical analysis, results, and a discussion of observational studies. Key words: Observational studies, cohort studies, case control studies, cross-sectional studies, allocation bias, sample size, Strengthening of the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE)

scholarly journals Fish Consumption and the Risk of Chronic Disease: An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses of Prospective Cohort Studies

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 1123-1133 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmad Jayedi ◽  
Sakineh Shab-Bidar
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Disease ◽  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Fish Consumption ◽  
Prospective Cohort ◽  
Lower Risk ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Prospective Cohort Studies ◽  
Moderate Quality ◽  
Meta Analyses

ABSTRACT We aimed to present a comprehensive review of published meta-analyses of prospective cohort studies on the association of fish consumption and the risk of chronic disease. A systematic search was undertaken in Pubmed and Scopus to October 2019 to find meta-analyses of observational studies evaluating the association of fish consumption and the risk of chronic disease. Retrospective and cross-sectional studies and studies with unadjusted risk estimates were excluded. The summary relative risk (SRR) for each meta-analysis was recalculated by using a random-effects model. The methodological quality of included meta-analyses and the quality of the evidence were assessed by the AMSTAR and NutriGrade tools, respectively. A total of 34 meta-analyses of prospective observational studies, reporting SRRs for 40 different outcomes obtained from 298 primary prospective cohort studies, were included. Moderate-quality evidence suggested that each 100-g/d increment in fish consumption was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality (SRR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.87, 0.97), cardiovascular mortality (SRR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.65, 0.87), coronary heart disease (SRR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.79, 0.99), myocardial infarction (SRR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.65, 0.93), stroke (SRR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.75, 0.99), heart failure (SRR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.67, 0.95), depression (SRR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.79, 0.98), and liver cancer (SRR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.48, 0.87). For cancers of most sites, there was no significant association and the quality of the evidence was rated low and very low. In conclusion, evidence of moderate quality suggests that fish consumption is associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular disease, depression, and mortality and, therefore, can be considered as a healthy animal-based dietary source of protein. Further research is needed for outcomes for which the quality of the evidence was rated low and very low, considering types of fish consumed, different methods of cooking fish, and all potential confounding variables.

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

PLoS ONE ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. e0169316 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martine Hendriksma ◽  
Michiel H. M. A. Joosten ◽  
Jeroen P. M. Peters ◽  
Wilko Grolman ◽  
Inge Stegeman
Keyword(s):  
Observational Studies ◽  
Quality Of Reporting ◽  
Strobe Statement
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document