The EQUATOR Network and reporting guidelines: Helping to achieve high standards in reporting health research studies

Maturitas ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 63 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iveta Simera ◽  
David Moher ◽  
John Hoey ◽  
Kenneth F. Schulz ◽  
Douglas G. Altman
Keyword(s):  
Health Research ◽  
Reporting Guidelines ◽  
Equator Network ◽  
High Standards ◽  
Research Studies

scholarly journals Reporting quality of the Delphi technique in reporting guidelines: a protocol for a systematic analysis of the EQUATOR Network Library

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. e024942 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masahiro Banno ◽  
Yasushi Tsujimoto ◽  
Yuki Kataoka
Keyword(s):  
Health Research ◽  
Delphi Technique ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Quality Score ◽  
Reporting Guidelines ◽  
Systematic Analysis ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
Equator Network ◽  
Modified Delphi Technique

IntroductionReporting guidelines are important tools for improving the quality of medical research. The Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) Network’s Library contains a comprehensive and up-to-date database of reporting guidelines relevant to health research. Only 31% of reporting guidelines published from 2010 to 2014 reported using the Delphi technique, and the reporting quality of the Delphi technique in reporting guidelines is unknown even though the use of the Delphi technique was recommended in the guidance for reporting guidelines. We will assess the quality reports of the Delphi technique or modified Delphi technique in reporting guidelines.Methods and analysisThe present study is a systematic analysis of the EQUATOR Network Library. We will include all reporting guidelines in the EQUATOR Network that used the Delphi technique or modified Delphi technique, published since 1 January 2011 and registered in the EQUATOR on or before 31 May 2018. Our primary outcome is the reporting quality of the Delphi technique, measured by the quality score (each item) in the Delphi technique. We will also examine the relationship between the reporting quality score (each item) of the Delphi technique and year of publication, number of authors, impact factor, sources of funding (industry, non-industry), multiple publications and whether the guidelines are published in open access policy.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval will not be applicable for this study. This protocol has been registered in the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry. We will publish our findings in a peer-reviewed journal and may also present them at conferences.Trial registration numberUMIN000032685.

scholarly journals Reporting guidelines of health research studies are frequently used inappropriately

2020 ◽  
Vol 122 ◽  
pp. 87-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Caulley ◽  
Ferrán Catalá-López ◽  
Jonathan Whelan ◽  
Michel Khoury ◽  
Jennifer Ferraro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Research ◽  
Reporting Guidelines ◽  
Research Studies

scholarly journals Principles for the production and dissemination of recruitment material for three clinical trials of an online intervention

Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Rennick-Egglestone
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Online Intervention ◽  
Ethics Committee ◽  
Promotional Material ◽  
Media Campaigns ◽  
Social Media Platforms ◽  
Ethical Oversight ◽  
Research Studies

AbstractSome health research studies recruit participants through electronic mechanisms such as the placement of messages on social media platforms. This raises questions for ethics committee oversight, since effective social media campaigns might involve the production and dissemination of hundreds of contemporaneous messages. For the Narrative Experiences Online (NEON) study, we have developed nine principles to control the production and dissemination of promotional material. These have been approved by an ethics committee and enable the audit of our recruitment work. We propose that the drafting for approval of recruitment principles by health research studies may, in many cases, strike an appropriate balance between enabling ethical oversight of online recruitment work and the potential burden of message review.

scholarly journals Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) in a FAIR Metadata Registry for COVID-19 Research

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie Anne Ines Klofenstein ◽  
Carina Nina Vorisek ◽  
Aliaksandra Shutsko ◽  
Moritz Lehne ◽  
Julian Sass ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Public Health Research ◽  
International Standards ◽  
Metadata Schema ◽  
Research Communities ◽  
Resource Type ◽  
Research Studies

Adopting international standards within health research communities can elevate data FAIRness and widen analysis possibilities. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the mapping feasibility against HL7® Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources® (FHIR)® of a generic metadata schema (MDS) created for a central search hub gathering COVID-19 health research (studies, questionnaires, documents = MDS resource types). Mapping results were rated by calculating the percentage of FHIR coverage. Among 86 items to map, total mapping coverage was 94%: 50 (58%) of the items were available as standard resources in FHIR and 31 (36%) could be mapped using extensions. Five items (6%) could not be mapped to FHIR. Analyzing each MDS resource type, there was a total mapping coverage of 93% for studies and 95% for questionnaires and documents, with 61% of the MDS items available as standard resources in FHIR for studies, 57% for questionnaires and 52% for documents. Extensions in studies, questionnaires and documents were used in 32%, 38% and 43% of items, respectively. This work shows that FHIR can be used as a standardized format in registries for clinical, epidemiological and public health research. However, further adjustments to the initial MDS are recommended – and two additional items even needed when implementing FHIR. Developing a MDS based on the FHIR standard could be a future approach to reduce data ambiguity and foster interoperability.

scholarly journals 2520

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (S1) ◽  
pp. 82-82
Author(s):  
Meghan Spiroff ◽  
Lisa Connally ◽  
Anita Johnson ◽  
Aalap Doshi ◽  
Patricia Piechowski
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Participant Recruitment ◽  
Gender And Age ◽  
Study Population ◽  
Gender And Age Differences ◽  
The University ◽  
Racial Ethnic ◽  
Research Studies

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Across the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Consortium, participant recruitment into clinical trials is essential to advance science. Without proper participant recruitment, clinical trials do not result in gains in scientific knowledge, wastes time, funds, and other resources (Mahon et al., 2015). METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Participant recruitment programs across the consortium are inconsistent in staffing, program services, and program goals. The participant recruitment program at the University of Michigan’s (U-M) Michigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research (MICHR) provides expertise, tools, and resources to facilitate participant recruitment in clinical and health research studies. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: We will explain our program infrastructure, staffing, services, and discuss how we maintain an engaged registry with over 27,000 participants interested in research studies at U-M. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Proper recruitment into clinical trials results in findings that are relevant for genetic, cultural, linguistic, racial/ethnic, gender, and age differences (Cottler et al., 2013). We hope to share our best practices that aid in the development and success of participant recruitment across the CTSA Consortium.

scholarly journals Protocol of reporting items for public versions of guidelines: the Reporting Tool for Practice Guidelines in Health Care—public versions of guidelines

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. e023147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoqin Wang ◽  
Qi Zhou ◽  
Yaolong Chen ◽  
Liang Yao ◽  
Qi Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Reporting Guidelines ◽  
Pilot Test ◽  
Individual Decision ◽  
Individual Decision Making ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
Equator Network ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Patient Consent ◽  
Reporting Tool

IntroductionPatient and public versions of guidelines (PVGs) can help with individual decision making and enhance the patient–clinician relationship by providing easily understandable and reliable information. An increasing number of guideline organisations are developing PVGs. However, the reporting of PVGs by different groups and organisations varies widely. This study aims to develop a reporting checklist for PVGs for healthcare.Methods and analysisWe will develop the PVG reporting checklist as an extension of the Reporting Tool for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT) statement. We will build on the methods recommended by the EQUATOR network, which is our starting point. We will conduct a literature review, establish an international multidisciplinary team, run a modified Delphi process to identify the reporting items and pilot test the draft reporting checklist. We plan to update the checklist every 3 years.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval and patient consent are not required since this study will not undertake any formal data collection involving humans or animals. The results of this protocol will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication.Trial registrationWe registered the protocol on the EQUATOR network (http://www.equator-network.org/library/reporting-guidelines-under-development/#84).

scholarly journals Interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines in health research: a scoping review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (11) ◽  
pp. e017551 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Blanco ◽  
Jamie J Kirkham ◽  
Douglas G Altman ◽  
David Moher ◽  
Isabelle Boutron ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Scoping Review ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Reporting Guidelines ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Improve Compliance ◽  
Review Protocol ◽  
Journal Policies ◽  
Research Stage

IntroductionThere is evidence that the use of some reporting guidelines, such as the Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials, is associated with improved completeness of reporting in health research. However, the current levels of adherence to reporting guidelines are suboptimal. Over the last few years, several actions aiming to improve compliance with reporting guidelines have been taken and proposed. We will conduct a scoping review of interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines in health research that have been evaluated or suggested, in order to inform future interventions.Methods and analysisOur review will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review methods manual. We will search for relevant studies in MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases. Moreover, we will carry out lateral searches from the reference lists of the included studies, as well as from the lists of articles citing the included ones. One reviewer will screen the full list, which will be randomly split into two halves and independently screened by the other two reviewers. Two reviewers will perform data extraction independently. Discrepancies will be solved through discussion. In addition, this search strategy will be supplemented by a grey literature search. The interventions found will be classified as assessed or suggested, as well as according to different criteria, in relation to their target (journal policies, journal editors, authors, reviewers, funders, ethical boards or others) or the research stage at which they are performed (design, conducting, reporting or peer review). Descriptive statistical analysis will be performed.Ethics and disseminationA paper summarising the findings from this review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. This scoping review will contribute to a better understanding and a broader perspective on how the problem of adhering better to reporting guidelines has been tackled so far. This could be a major first step towards developing future strategies to improve compliance with reporting guidelines in health research.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document