基于音乐干预的报告指南:一项更新和验证研究

IF 3 4区 医学 Q2 INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE
Sheri L Robb , Stacey Springs , Emmeline Edwards , Tasha L. Golden , Julene K. Johnson , Debra S. Burns , Melita Belgrave , Joke Bradt , Christian Gold , Assal Habibi , John R. Iversen , Miriam Lense , Jessica A. MacLean , Susan M. Perkins
{"title":"基于音乐干预的报告指南:一项更新和验证研究","authors":"Sheri L Robb ,&nbsp;Stacey Springs ,&nbsp;Emmeline Edwards ,&nbsp;Tasha L. Golden ,&nbsp;Julene K. Johnson ,&nbsp;Debra S. Burns ,&nbsp;Melita Belgrave ,&nbsp;Joke Bradt ,&nbsp;Christian Gold ,&nbsp;Assal Habibi ,&nbsp;John R. Iversen ,&nbsp;Miriam Lense ,&nbsp;Jessica A. MacLean ,&nbsp;Susan M. Perkins","doi":"10.1016/j.imr.2025.101199","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Detailed intervention reporting is essential to interpretation, replication, and translation of music-based interventions (MBIs). The 2011 <em>Reporting Guidelines for Music-Based Interventions</em> were developed to improve transparency and reporting quality of published research; however, problems with reporting quality persist.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>The purpose of this study was to update and validate the 2011 reporting guidelines using rigorous Delphi approach that involved an interdisciplinary group of MBI researchers; and to develop an explanation and elaboration guidance statement to support dissemination and usage. We followed the methodological framework for developing reporting guidelines recommended by the EQUATOR Network and guidance recommendations for developing health research reporting guidelines. Our three-stage process included: (1) an initial field scan, (2) a consensus process using Delphi surveys (two rounds) and Expert Panel meetings, and (3) development and dissemination of an explanation and elaboration document.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>First-Round survey findings revealed that the original checklist items were capturing content that investigators deemed essential to MBI reporting; however, it also revealed problems with item wording and terminology. Subsequent Expert Panel meetings and the Second-Round survey centered on reaching consensus for item language. The revised RG-MBI checklist has a total of 12-items that pertain to eight different components of MBI interventions including name, theory/scientific rationale, content, interventionist, individual/group, setting, delivery schedule, and treatment fidelity.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>We recommend that authors, journal editors, and reviewers use the RG-MBI guidelines, in conjunction with methods-based guidelines (e.g., CONSORT) to accelerate and improve the scientific rigor of MBI research.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":13644,"journal":{"name":"Integrative Medicine Research","volume":"14 3","pages":"Article 101199"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reporting guidelines for music-based interventions: An update and validation study\",\"authors\":\"Sheri L Robb ,&nbsp;Stacey Springs ,&nbsp;Emmeline Edwards ,&nbsp;Tasha L. Golden ,&nbsp;Julene K. Johnson ,&nbsp;Debra S. Burns ,&nbsp;Melita Belgrave ,&nbsp;Joke Bradt ,&nbsp;Christian Gold ,&nbsp;Assal Habibi ,&nbsp;John R. Iversen ,&nbsp;Miriam Lense ,&nbsp;Jessica A. MacLean ,&nbsp;Susan M. Perkins\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.imr.2025.101199\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Detailed intervention reporting is essential to interpretation, replication, and translation of music-based interventions (MBIs). The 2011 <em>Reporting Guidelines for Music-Based Interventions</em> were developed to improve transparency and reporting quality of published research; however, problems with reporting quality persist.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>The purpose of this study was to update and validate the 2011 reporting guidelines using rigorous Delphi approach that involved an interdisciplinary group of MBI researchers; and to develop an explanation and elaboration guidance statement to support dissemination and usage. We followed the methodological framework for developing reporting guidelines recommended by the EQUATOR Network and guidance recommendations for developing health research reporting guidelines. Our three-stage process included: (1) an initial field scan, (2) a consensus process using Delphi surveys (two rounds) and Expert Panel meetings, and (3) development and dissemination of an explanation and elaboration document.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>First-Round survey findings revealed that the original checklist items were capturing content that investigators deemed essential to MBI reporting; however, it also revealed problems with item wording and terminology. Subsequent Expert Panel meetings and the Second-Round survey centered on reaching consensus for item language. The revised RG-MBI checklist has a total of 12-items that pertain to eight different components of MBI interventions including name, theory/scientific rationale, content, interventionist, individual/group, setting, delivery schedule, and treatment fidelity.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>We recommend that authors, journal editors, and reviewers use the RG-MBI guidelines, in conjunction with methods-based guidelines (e.g., CONSORT) to accelerate and improve the scientific rigor of MBI research.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13644,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Integrative Medicine Research\",\"volume\":\"14 3\",\"pages\":\"Article 101199\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Integrative Medicine Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213422025000794\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Integrative Medicine Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213422025000794","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:详细的干预报告对于音乐干预(mbi)的解释、复制和翻译至关重要。制定了2011年基于音乐的干预措施报告指南,以提高已发表研究的透明度和报告质量;然而,报告质量的问题仍然存在。方法本研究的目的是更新和验证2011年的报告指南,采用严格的德尔菲法,涉及跨学科的MBI研究小组;并制定一个解释和阐述指导声明,以支持传播和使用。我们遵循赤道网络建议的编制报告准则的方法框架和编制卫生研究报告准则的指导性建议。我们的三个阶段过程包括:(1)初始现场扫描,(2)使用德尔菲调查(两轮)和专家小组会议达成共识的过程,以及(3)制定和传播一份解释和阐述文件。第一轮调查结果显示,最初的清单项目捕获了调查人员认为对MBI报告至关重要的内容;但是,它也暴露了项目措辞和术语方面的问题。随后的专家小组会议和第二轮调查的重点是就项目语言达成协商一致意见。修订后的RG-MBI检查表共有12个项目,涉及MBI干预措施的8个不同组成部分,包括名称、理论/科学依据、内容、干预者、个人/团体、环境、交付时间表和治疗保真度。我们建议作者、期刊编辑和审稿人将RG-MBI指南与基于方法的指南(如CONSORT)结合使用,以加速和提高MBI研究的科学严谨性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reporting guidelines for music-based interventions: An update and validation study

Background

Detailed intervention reporting is essential to interpretation, replication, and translation of music-based interventions (MBIs). The 2011 Reporting Guidelines for Music-Based Interventions were developed to improve transparency and reporting quality of published research; however, problems with reporting quality persist.

Methods

The purpose of this study was to update and validate the 2011 reporting guidelines using rigorous Delphi approach that involved an interdisciplinary group of MBI researchers; and to develop an explanation and elaboration guidance statement to support dissemination and usage. We followed the methodological framework for developing reporting guidelines recommended by the EQUATOR Network and guidance recommendations for developing health research reporting guidelines. Our three-stage process included: (1) an initial field scan, (2) a consensus process using Delphi surveys (two rounds) and Expert Panel meetings, and (3) development and dissemination of an explanation and elaboration document.

Results

First-Round survey findings revealed that the original checklist items were capturing content that investigators deemed essential to MBI reporting; however, it also revealed problems with item wording and terminology. Subsequent Expert Panel meetings and the Second-Round survey centered on reaching consensus for item language. The revised RG-MBI checklist has a total of 12-items that pertain to eight different components of MBI interventions including name, theory/scientific rationale, content, interventionist, individual/group, setting, delivery schedule, and treatment fidelity.

Conclusion

We recommend that authors, journal editors, and reviewers use the RG-MBI guidelines, in conjunction with methods-based guidelines (e.g., CONSORT) to accelerate and improve the scientific rigor of MBI research.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Integrative Medicine Research
Integrative Medicine Research Medicine-Complementary and Alternative Medicine
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
2.90%
发文量
65
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Integrative Medicine Research (IMR) is a quarterly, peer-reviewed journal focused on scientific research for integrative medicine including traditional medicine (emphasis on acupuncture and herbal medicine), complementary and alternative medicine, and systems medicine. The journal includes papers on basic research, clinical research, methodology, theory, computational analysis and modelling, topical reviews, medical history, education and policy based on physiology, pathology, diagnosis and the systems approach in the field of integrative medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信