Adherence of Observational Studies Published in Indian Journals to STRO BE Statement.

Autor:	Nagarajan VB; Post Graduate Resident,Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Seth GS Medical College, KEM Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra., Bhide S; Associate Professor,Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Seth GS Medical College, KEM Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, Corresponding Author., Kanase HR; Post Graduate Resident,Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Seth GS Medical College, KEM Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra., Potey AV; Specialty Medical Officer, Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Seth GS Medical College, KEM Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra., Tadavi F; Assistant Professor, Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Seth GS Medical College, KEM Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	The Journal of the Association of Physicians of India [J Assoc Physicians India] 2018 Dec; Vol. 66 (12), pp. 39-42.
Abstrakt:	Purpose Aim: Quality of reporting is very important in medical research. To ensure a uniform and detailed reporting of observational studies experts came out with a checklist of items, named 'Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology' (STROBE). The present study examines the adherence of observational studies published in selected Indian journals from 2011-2015 to STROBE Statement. Method: 7 open access Indian journals, belonging to different specialities were selected. All the observational studies were assessed by 5 independent reviewers for the adherence to STROBE checklist as 'yes, partly and no'. The completeness of reporting was also assessed. Results: A total of 271 articles were examined. Only 10 items (Abstract, Background/rationale, Objectives, Study Setting, Data sources/ measurement, Quantitative variables, number of Participants at each stage, Characteristics of study participants, Key results) out of the 22 items and their subdivisions of STROBE were adhered to, in more than 70% of articles. Other 10 items (bias, subgroup analysis, addressing missing data, sensitivity analysis, reason for nonparticipation, flow diagram, missing data) had adherence in less than 30% of the articles. The completeness of reporting was 50.5%, 49.12% and 43.06% in cross sectional, cohort and case control study, respectively. Conclusion: The overall reporting was suboptimal. The completeness of reporting did not differ in the three types of observational study designs. (© Journal of the Association of Physicians of India 2011.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu