报告批准经颅电刺激(率):专家建议基于德尔菲共识研究。

IF 16 1区 生物学 Q1 BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS
Vahid Nejati, Zahra Vaziri, Andrea Antal, Daria Antonenko, Roozbeh Behroozmand, Sven Bestmann, Jerome Brunelin, Andre R Brunoni, Sandra Carvalho, Nick J Davis, Peter G Enticott, Andreas J Fallgatter, Roberta Ferrucci, Paul B Fitzgerald, Masashi Hamada, Roy H Hamilton, Kate E Hoy, Shapour Jaberzadeh, Asif Jamil, Roi Cohen Kadosh, Bart Krekelberg, Steven Laureys, Leonor J Romero Lauro, Colleen K Loo, Donel Martin, Giovanni Martinotti, Marine Mondino, Antonio Oliviero, Maria Concetta Pellicciari, Christian Plewnia, Gorana Pobric, Rudi De Raedt, Lais B Razza, Lorenzo Rocchi, Mohammad Ali Salehinejad, Azin Sarraj Khorrami, Martin Schecklmann, Hartwig Roman Siebner, Stephan F Taylor, Marie-Anne Vanderhasselt, Sven Vanneste, Carmelo M Vicario, Adam J Woods, Ulf Ziemann, Michael A Nitsche
{"title":"报告批准经颅电刺激(率):专家建议基于德尔菲共识研究。","authors":"Vahid Nejati, Zahra Vaziri, Andrea Antal, Daria Antonenko, Roozbeh Behroozmand, Sven Bestmann, Jerome Brunelin, Andre R Brunoni, Sandra Carvalho, Nick J Davis, Peter G Enticott, Andreas J Fallgatter, Roberta Ferrucci, Paul B Fitzgerald, Masashi Hamada, Roy H Hamilton, Kate E Hoy, Shapour Jaberzadeh, Asif Jamil, Roi Cohen Kadosh, Bart Krekelberg, Steven Laureys, Leonor J Romero Lauro, Colleen K Loo, Donel Martin, Giovanni Martinotti, Marine Mondino, Antonio Oliviero, Maria Concetta Pellicciari, Christian Plewnia, Gorana Pobric, Rudi De Raedt, Lais B Razza, Lorenzo Rocchi, Mohammad Ali Salehinejad, Azin Sarraj Khorrami, Martin Schecklmann, Hartwig Roman Siebner, Stephan F Taylor, Marie-Anne Vanderhasselt, Sven Vanneste, Carmelo M Vicario, Adam J Woods, Ulf Ziemann, Michael A Nitsche","doi":"10.1038/s41596-025-01259-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) has gained substantial momentum as a research and therapeutic tool; however, it suffers from challenges related to reproducibility and quality assessment due to the absence of standardized reporting practices. Here we aim to develop a comprehensive and consensus-based checklist for conducting and reporting tES studies to enhance the quality of research and reports. In this Consensus Statement, we used a Delphi approach conducted across three rounds and involving 38 experts to identify crucial elements required to report in tES studies. This consensus-driven approach included the evaluation of the interquartile deviation (>1.00), the percentage of positive responses (above 60%) and mean importance ratings (<3), hence ensuring the creation of a robust and well-balanced checklist. These metrics were utilized to assess both the consensus reached and importance ratings for each item. Consensus was reached, leading to the retention of 66 out of the initial 70 items. These items were categorized into five groups: participants (12 items), stimulation device (9 items), electrodes (12 items), current (12 items) and procedure (25 items). We then distilled a shorter version of the checklist, which includes the 26 items deemed essential. The Report Approval for Transcranial Electrical Stimulation (RATES) checklist is relevant to those carrying out and assessing tES studies, as it provides a structured framework for researchers to consider and report. For reviewers, it can serve as a tool to assess completeness, comprehensiveness and transparency of reports. In addition, the RATES checklist aims to promote a deeper understanding of tES and facilitates comparisons between studies within the field. Overall, the RATES checklist provides a shared reference point that may improve research quality, foster harmonization in reporting and, ultimately, enhance the interpretability and reproducibility of findings in both research and clinical contexts.</p>","PeriodicalId":18901,"journal":{"name":"Nature Protocols","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":16.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Report Approval for Transcranial Electrical Stimulation (RATES): expert recommendation based on a Delphi consensus study.\",\"authors\":\"Vahid Nejati, Zahra Vaziri, Andrea Antal, Daria Antonenko, Roozbeh Behroozmand, Sven Bestmann, Jerome Brunelin, Andre R Brunoni, Sandra Carvalho, Nick J Davis, Peter G Enticott, Andreas J Fallgatter, Roberta Ferrucci, Paul B Fitzgerald, Masashi Hamada, Roy H Hamilton, Kate E Hoy, Shapour Jaberzadeh, Asif Jamil, Roi Cohen Kadosh, Bart Krekelberg, Steven Laureys, Leonor J Romero Lauro, Colleen K Loo, Donel Martin, Giovanni Martinotti, Marine Mondino, Antonio Oliviero, Maria Concetta Pellicciari, Christian Plewnia, Gorana Pobric, Rudi De Raedt, Lais B Razza, Lorenzo Rocchi, Mohammad Ali Salehinejad, Azin Sarraj Khorrami, Martin Schecklmann, Hartwig Roman Siebner, Stephan F Taylor, Marie-Anne Vanderhasselt, Sven Vanneste, Carmelo M Vicario, Adam J Woods, Ulf Ziemann, Michael A Nitsche\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41596-025-01259-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) has gained substantial momentum as a research and therapeutic tool; however, it suffers from challenges related to reproducibility and quality assessment due to the absence of standardized reporting practices. Here we aim to develop a comprehensive and consensus-based checklist for conducting and reporting tES studies to enhance the quality of research and reports. In this Consensus Statement, we used a Delphi approach conducted across three rounds and involving 38 experts to identify crucial elements required to report in tES studies. This consensus-driven approach included the evaluation of the interquartile deviation (>1.00), the percentage of positive responses (above 60%) and mean importance ratings (<3), hence ensuring the creation of a robust and well-balanced checklist. These metrics were utilized to assess both the consensus reached and importance ratings for each item. Consensus was reached, leading to the retention of 66 out of the initial 70 items. These items were categorized into five groups: participants (12 items), stimulation device (9 items), electrodes (12 items), current (12 items) and procedure (25 items). We then distilled a shorter version of the checklist, which includes the 26 items deemed essential. The Report Approval for Transcranial Electrical Stimulation (RATES) checklist is relevant to those carrying out and assessing tES studies, as it provides a structured framework for researchers to consider and report. For reviewers, it can serve as a tool to assess completeness, comprehensiveness and transparency of reports. In addition, the RATES checklist aims to promote a deeper understanding of tES and facilitates comparisons between studies within the field. Overall, the RATES checklist provides a shared reference point that may improve research quality, foster harmonization in reporting and, ultimately, enhance the interpretability and reproducibility of findings in both research and clinical contexts.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18901,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nature Protocols\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nature Protocols\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41596-025-01259-0\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature Protocols","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41596-025-01259-0","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

经颅电刺激(tES)作为一种研究和治疗工具已经获得了巨大的发展势头;然而,由于缺乏标准化的报告做法,它面临着与再现性和质量评估有关的挑战。我们的目标是制定一份全面和以共识为基础的核对表,以进行和报告工商业污水处理研究,以提高研究和报告的质素。在这份共识声明中,我们使用了德尔菲法,共进行了三轮,涉及38位专家,以确定tES研究报告所需的关键要素。这种共识驱动的方法包括评估四分位数偏差(bbb1.00)、积极回应的百分比(超过60%)和平均重要性评级(
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Report Approval for Transcranial Electrical Stimulation (RATES): expert recommendation based on a Delphi consensus study.

Transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) has gained substantial momentum as a research and therapeutic tool; however, it suffers from challenges related to reproducibility and quality assessment due to the absence of standardized reporting practices. Here we aim to develop a comprehensive and consensus-based checklist for conducting and reporting tES studies to enhance the quality of research and reports. In this Consensus Statement, we used a Delphi approach conducted across three rounds and involving 38 experts to identify crucial elements required to report in tES studies. This consensus-driven approach included the evaluation of the interquartile deviation (>1.00), the percentage of positive responses (above 60%) and mean importance ratings (<3), hence ensuring the creation of a robust and well-balanced checklist. These metrics were utilized to assess both the consensus reached and importance ratings for each item. Consensus was reached, leading to the retention of 66 out of the initial 70 items. These items were categorized into five groups: participants (12 items), stimulation device (9 items), electrodes (12 items), current (12 items) and procedure (25 items). We then distilled a shorter version of the checklist, which includes the 26 items deemed essential. The Report Approval for Transcranial Electrical Stimulation (RATES) checklist is relevant to those carrying out and assessing tES studies, as it provides a structured framework for researchers to consider and report. For reviewers, it can serve as a tool to assess completeness, comprehensiveness and transparency of reports. In addition, the RATES checklist aims to promote a deeper understanding of tES and facilitates comparisons between studies within the field. Overall, the RATES checklist provides a shared reference point that may improve research quality, foster harmonization in reporting and, ultimately, enhance the interpretability and reproducibility of findings in both research and clinical contexts.

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
Nature Protocols
Nature Protocols 生物-生化研究方法
CiteScore
29.10
自引率
0.70%
发文量
128
审稿时长
4 months
期刊介绍: Nature Protocols focuses on publishing protocols used to address significant biological and biomedical science research questions, including methods grounded in physics and chemistry with practical applications to biological problems. The journal caters to a primary audience of research scientists and, as such, exclusively publishes protocols with research applications. Protocols primarily aimed at influencing patient management and treatment decisions are not featured. The specific techniques covered encompass a wide range, including but not limited to: Biochemistry, Cell biology, Cell culture, Chemical modification, Computational biology, Developmental biology, Epigenomics, Genetic analysis, Genetic modification, Genomics, Imaging, Immunology, Isolation, purification, and separation, Lipidomics, Metabolomics, Microbiology, Model organisms, Nanotechnology, Neuroscience, Nucleic-acid-based molecular biology, Pharmacology, Plant biology, Protein analysis, Proteomics, Spectroscopy, Structural biology, Synthetic chemistry, Tissue culture, Toxicology, and Virology.
×
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