Adherence to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology Statement in Observational Studies Published in Iranian Medical Journals
Background: Although much medical knowledge comes from observational research, such studies are more prone to confounding and bias than others. This study was conducted to evaluate the adherence of the observational studies published in Iranian medical journals to the STROBE (strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology) statement.
Methods: In this cross-sectional study, we selected 150 articles of Iranian medical journals, using multistage sampling from Aug 2016 to Jun 2017. The reported items of the STROBE statement in the articles was determined and considered as the adherence of the articles to the statement. The adherence of the articles with different characteristics was compared.
Results: The adherence of the articles to the statement varied from 24% to 68% with a mean score of 48%±9%. The lowest mean scores were found in the Result (36%) and Method (49%) sections. The adherence was significantly better in the articles published in the journals indexed in PubMed or Web of Knowledge (ISI) databases (P<0.001) and those written by cooperation of the authors from other countries (P=0.044).
Conclusion: The evaluated articles in our study had not adequately reported the items recommended by the STROBE statement. This indicates deficiency in key elements for readers to assess the validity and applicability of a study.
2. Pouwels KB, Widyakusuma NN, Groenwold RH et al (2016). Quality of reporting of confounding remained suboptimal after the STROBE guideline. J Clin Epidemiol, 69:217-24.
3. Kim MR, Kim MY, Kim SY et al (2012). The quality of reporting of cohort, case-control studies in the korean journal of family medicine. Korean J Fam Med, 33 (2):79-88.
4. Pocock SJ, Collier TJ, Dandreo KJ et al (2004). Issues in the reporting of epidemiological studies: a survey of recent practice. BMJ, 329 (7471):883.
5. Von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M et al (2007). The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. J Clin Epidemiol, (4):344-9.
6. Goi PD, Goi JD, Cordini KL et al (2014). Evaluating psychiatric case-control studies using the STROBE (STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational Studies in Epidemiology) statement. Sao Paulo Med J, 132 (3): 178-83.
7. Tapia JC, Ruiz EF, Ponce OJ et al (2015). Weaknesses in the reporting of cross-sectional studies according to the STROBE statement: the case of metabolic syndrome in adults from Peru. Colomb Med (Cali), 46 (4): 168-75.
8. Poorolajal J, Cheraghi Z, Irani AD et al (2011). Quality of Cohort Studies Reporting Post the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement. Epidemiol Health, 33: e2011005.
9. Lee JH (2014). Addressing the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement in Archives of Plastic Surgery Reports. Arch Plast Surg, 41 (1): 1-2.
10. Hasbahceci M, Basak F, Uysal O (2014). Evaluation of reporting quality of the 2010 and 2012 National Surgical Congress oral presentations by CONSORT, STROBE and Timmer criteria. Ulus Cerrahi Derg, 30 (3): 138-46.
11. Bastuji-Garin S, Sbidian E, Gaudy-Marqueste C et al (2013). Impact of STROBE statement publication on quality of observational study reporting: interrupted time series versus before-after analysis. PLoS One, 8 (8): e64733.
12. Iranian Medical Journals [internet]. Ministry of Health and Medical Education; Available from: https://journals.research.ac.ir/ Accessed 12 June, 2016.
13. Sarveravan P, Astaneh B, Shokrpour N (2017). Adherence to the CONSORT Statement in the Reporting of Randomized Controlled Trials on Pharmacological Interventions Published in Iranian Medical Journals. Iran J Med Sci, 42 (6): 532-43.
14. Parsons NR, Hiskens R, Price CL et al (2011). A systematic survey of the quality of research reporting in general orthopaedic journals. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 93 (9): 1154-9.
15. Serrano M, Gonzalvo MC, Sanchez-Pozo MC et al (2014). Adherence to reporting guidelines in observational studies concerning exposure to persistent organic pollutants and effects on semen parameters. Hum Reprod, 29 (6): 1122-33.
16. Rao A, Bruck K, Methven S et al (2016). Quality of Reporting and Study Design of CKD Cohort Studies Assessing Mortality in the Elderly Before and After STROBE: A Systematic Review. PLoS One, 11 (5): e0155078.
17. Fung AE, Palanki R, Bakri SJ et al (2009). Applying the CONSORT and STROBE statements to evaluate the reporting quality of neovascular age-related macular degeneration studies. Ophthalmology, 116 (2): 286-96.
18. Delaney M, Meyer E, Cserti-Gazdewich C et al (2010). A systematic assessment of the quality of reporting for platelet transfusion studies. Transfusion, 50 (10): 2135-44.
19. Hendriksma M, Joosten MH, Peters JP et al (2017). Evaluation of the Quality of Reporting of Observational Studies in Otorhinolaryngology-Based on the STROBE Statement. PLoS One, 12 (1): e0169316.
20. Tacconelli E, Cataldo MA, Paul M et al (2016). STROBE-AMS: recommendations to optimise reporting of epidemiological studies on antimicrobial resistance and informing improvement in antimicrobial stewardship. BMJ Open, 6 (2): e010134.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.