Guidelines for Reporting Medical Research: A Critical Appraisal

Mathilde Johansen; Simon Francis Thomsen

doi:10.1155/2016/1346026

Guidelines for Reporting Medical Research: A Critical Appraisal

Mathilde Johansen, Simon Francis Thomsen

38 Citationer (Scopus)

57 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

As a response to a low quality of reporting of medical research, guidelines for several different types of study design have been developed to secure accurate reporting and transparency for reviewers and readers from the scientific community. Herein, we review and discuss the six most widely accepted and used guidelines: PRISMA, CONSORT, STROBE, MOOSE, STARD, and SPIRIT. It is concluded that the implementation of these guidelines has led to only a moderate improvement in the quality of the reporting of medical research. There is still much work to be done to achieve accurate and transparent reporting of medical research findings.

Originalsprog	Engelsk
Artikelnummer	1346026
Tidsskrift	ISRN Biodiversity
Vol/bind	2016
Antal sider	7
DOI	https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/1346026
Status	Udgivet - 2016

Adgang til dokumentet

10.1155/2016/1346026Licens: CC BY

Guidelines for Reporting Medical Research: A Critical AppraisalForlagets udgivne version, 1,2 MBLicens: CC BY

Citationsformater

@article{bb4b1b14fe914e1b87404a6d117ab479,

title = "Guidelines for Reporting Medical Research: A Critical Appraisal",

abstract = "As a response to a low quality of reporting of medical research, guidelines for several different types of study design have been developed to secure accurate reporting and transparency for reviewers and readers from the scientific community. Herein, we review and discuss the six most widely accepted and used guidelines: PRISMA, CONSORT, STROBE, MOOSE, STARD, and SPIRIT. It is concluded that the implementation of these guidelines has led to only a moderate improvement in the quality of the reporting of medical research. There is still much work to be done to achieve accurate and transparent reporting of medical research findings.",

author = "Mathilde Johansen and Thomsen, {Simon Francis}",

year = "2016",

doi = "10.1155/2016/1346026",

language = "English",

volume = "2016",

journal = "ISRN Biodiversity",

issn = "2356-7872",

publisher = "Hindawi Publishing Corporation",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Guidelines for Reporting Medical Research

T2 - A Critical Appraisal

AU - Johansen, Mathilde

AU - Thomsen, Simon Francis

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - As a response to a low quality of reporting of medical research, guidelines for several different types of study design have been developed to secure accurate reporting and transparency for reviewers and readers from the scientific community. Herein, we review and discuss the six most widely accepted and used guidelines: PRISMA, CONSORT, STROBE, MOOSE, STARD, and SPIRIT. It is concluded that the implementation of these guidelines has led to only a moderate improvement in the quality of the reporting of medical research. There is still much work to be done to achieve accurate and transparent reporting of medical research findings.

AB - As a response to a low quality of reporting of medical research, guidelines for several different types of study design have been developed to secure accurate reporting and transparency for reviewers and readers from the scientific community. Herein, we review and discuss the six most widely accepted and used guidelines: PRISMA, CONSORT, STROBE, MOOSE, STARD, and SPIRIT. It is concluded that the implementation of these guidelines has led to only a moderate improvement in the quality of the reporting of medical research. There is still much work to be done to achieve accurate and transparent reporting of medical research findings.

U2 - 10.1155/2016/1346026

DO - 10.1155/2016/1346026

M3 - Review

C2 - 27382637

SN - 2356-7872

VL - 2016

JO - ISRN Biodiversity

JF - ISRN Biodiversity

M1 - 1346026

ER -

Guidelines for Reporting Medical Research: A Critical Appraisal

Abstract

Adgang til dokumentet

Fingeraftryk

Citationsformater