医学研究报告指南:一项批判性评估。

International Scholarly Research Notices Pub Date : 2016-03-22 eCollection Date: 2016-01-01 DOI:10.1155/2016/1346026
Mathilde Johansen, Simon Francis Thomsen
{"title":"医学研究报告指南:一项批判性评估。","authors":"Mathilde Johansen,&nbsp;Simon Francis Thomsen","doi":"10.1155/2016/1346026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>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. </p>","PeriodicalId":14433,"journal":{"name":"International Scholarly Research Notices","volume":"2016 ","pages":"1346026"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2016/1346026","citationCount":"54","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Guidelines for Reporting Medical Research: A Critical Appraisal.\",\"authors\":\"Mathilde Johansen,&nbsp;Simon Francis Thomsen\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2016/1346026\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>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. </p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14433,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Scholarly Research Notices\",\"volume\":\"2016 \",\"pages\":\"1346026\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-03-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2016/1346026\",\"citationCount\":\"54\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Scholarly Research Notices\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/1346026\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2016/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Scholarly Research Notices","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/1346026","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2016/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 54

摘要

作为对医学研究报告质量低的回应,已经制定了几种不同类型的研究设计指南,以确保科学社区的审稿人和读者的准确报告和透明度。在这里,我们回顾和讨论六个最广泛接受和使用的指南:PRISMA, CONSORT, STROBE, MOOSE, standard和SPIRIT。结论是,这些准则的实施只导致医学研究报告质量的适度改善。要实现准确和透明地报告医学研究结果,仍有许多工作要做。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Guidelines for Reporting Medical Research: A Critical Appraisal.

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.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信