加强流行病学观察研究报告
观察研究
检查表
批判性评价
报告审判综合标准
质量(理念)
心理学
语句(逻辑)
梅德林
医学
医学教育
替代医学
病理
政治学
认知心理学
语言学
认识论
哲学
法学
作者
Jan P. Vandenbroucke,Erik von Elm,Douglas G. Altman,Peter C Gøtzsche,Cynthia D. Mulrow,Stuart Pocock,Charles Poole,James J. Schlesselman,Matthias Egger
出处
期刊:PubMed
日期:2014-12-01
卷期号:12 (12): 1500-24
被引量:4467
标识
DOI:10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.07.014
摘要
Much medical research is observational. The reporting of observational studies is often of insufficient quality. Poor reporting hampers the assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of a study and the generalisability of its results. Taking into account empirical evidence and theoretical considerations, a group of methodologists, researchers, and editors developed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) recommendations to improve the quality of reporting of observational studies. The STROBE Statement consists of a checklist of 22 items, which relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results and discussion sections of articles. Eighteen items are common to cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies and four are specific to each of the three study designs. The STROBE Statement provides guidance to authors about how to improve the reporting of observational studies and facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of studies by reviewers, journal editors and readers. This explanatory and elaboration document is intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the STROBE Statement. The meaning and rationale for each checklist item are presented. For each item, one or several published examples and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature are provided. Examples of useful flow diagrams are also included. The STROBE Statement, this document, and the associated Web site (http://www.strobe-statement.org/) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of observational research.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI