Open AccessEvaluation of the Quality of Reporting of Observational Studies in Otorhinolaryngology - Based on the STROBE Statement
Author(s) -
Martine Hendriksma,
Michiel H. M. A. Joosten,
Jeroen P. M. Peters,
Wilko Grolman,
Inge Stegeman
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
plos one
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.99
H-Index - 332
ISSN - 1932-6203
DOI - 10.1371/journal.pone.0169316
Subject(s) - observational study , strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology , checklist , medicine , otorhinolaryngology , medline , evidence based medicine , family medicine , randomized controlled trial , consolidated standards of reporting trials , alternative medicine , psychology , surgery , pathology , political science , law , cognitive psychology
Background Observational studies are the most frequently published studies in literature. When randomized controlled trials cannot be conducted because of ethical or practical considerations, an observational study design is the first choice. The STROBE Statement ( STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology ) was developed to provide guidance on how to adequately report observational studies. Objectives The objectives were 1) to evaluate the quality of reporting of observational studies of otorhinolaryngologic literature using the STROBE Statement checklist, 2) to compare the quality of reporting of observational studies in the top 5 Ear, Nose, Throat (ENT) journals versus the top 5 general medical journals and 3) to formulate recommendations to improve adequate reporting of observational research in otorhinolaryngologic literature. Methods The top 5 general medical journals and top 5 otorhinolaryngologic journals were selected based on their ISI Web of Knowledge impact factors. On August 3 rd , 2015, we performed a PubMed search using different filters to retrieve observational articles from these journals. Studies were selected from 2010 to 2014 for the general medical journals and from 2015 for the ENT journals. We assessed all STROBE items to examine how many items were reported adequately for each journal type. Results The articles in the top 5 general medical journals (n = 11) reported a mean of 69.2% (95% confidence interval (CI): 65.8%–72.7%; median 70.6%), whereas the top 5 ENT journals (n = 29) reported a mean of 51.4% (95% CI: 47.7%–55.0%; median 50.0%). The two journal types reported STROBE items significantly different ( p < .001). Conclusion Quality of reporting of observational studies in otorhinolaryngologic articles can considerably enhance. The quality of reporting was better in general medical journals compared to ENT journals. To improve the quality of reporting of observational studies, we recommend authors and editors to endorse and actively implement the STROBE Statement.