Using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement to Assess Reporting of Observational Trials in Hand Surgery

Purpose To use the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement checklist to critically evaluate the change in quality of observational trial reporting in the Journal of Hand Surgery American between 2005 and 2011. Methods A cross-sectional analysis of obse...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of hand surgery (American ed.) 2013-08, Vol.38 (8), p.1584-1589.e2
Hauptverfasser: Sorensen, Amelia A., MD, Wojahn, Robert D., BS, Manske, Mary Claire, MD, Calfee, Ryan P., MD, MSc
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1589.e2
container_issue 8
container_start_page 1584
container_title The Journal of hand surgery (American ed.)
container_volume 38
creator Sorensen, Amelia A., MD
Wojahn, Robert D., BS
Manske, Mary Claire, MD
Calfee, Ryan P., MD, MSc
description Purpose To use the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement checklist to critically evaluate the change in quality of observational trial reporting in the Journal of Hand Surgery American between 2005 and 2011. Methods A cross-sectional analysis of observational studies published in the Journal of Hand Surgery American was designed to sample 2 6-month periods of publication (March 2005 to August 2005 and June 2011 to November 2011). Fifty-one items were extracted from the STROBE statement for evaluation. Overall STROBE compliance rates for articles and specific checklist items were determined. Final compliance percentages from each period were compared by Student t -testing. Changes in item compliance over time were quantified. Results Overall compliance with the STROBE statement was 38% (range, 10%–54%) in 2005 and 58% (range, 39%–85%) for 2011 manuscripts representing a significant improvement. Seventy-five percent or greater of articles (2005/2011) provided the explicit reporting of background (100%/97%), follow-up time (85%/94%), overall interpretation of data (100%/94%), and results of similar studies (95%/89%). Twenty-five percent or less of articles provided the study design in the abstract (10%/20%), a clear description of the study's setting (10%/23%), the handling of missing data (0%/6%), the potential directions of bias (5%/11%), and the use of a power analysis (0%/17%). Eighty-six percent (44/51) of items were more frequently satisfied in 2011 articles than in 2005 publications. Absolute increases in compliance rates of 40% or greater were noted in 10 items (20%) with no worsening in compliance for an individual item over 6%. Conclusions The overall quality of the reporting of observational trials in the Journal of Hand Surgery American improved from 2005 to 2011. Current observational trials in hand surgery could still benefit from increased reporting of methodological details including the use of power analyses, the handling of missing data, and consideration of potential bias. Level of evidence Diagnostic III.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jhsa.2013.05.008
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1415602267</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0363502313006679</els_id><sourcerecordid>1415602267</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c455t-fbb28a1bc63e4405472b148f2e4ba31285de83762fa6b63f955de5c61546e41b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9ks1u1DAUhS0EotPCC7BAWZZFgv8nlRBSqaYUqdJInenacpybqUNiD7ZTaR6Gd8VhWhYsurJ99Z0jHZ-L0AeCK4KJ_NxX_UPUFcWEVVhUGNev0IIIRkopJH-NFphJVgpM2Qk6jbHHOKuYeItOKKu5ELVcoN_30bpdkR6g2KQAbpdv7nlyB3sf0vzyXbFuIoRHnax3esjw1FqIhXXFam9bGK0f_O5QnG-2d-tvq08Z0AlGcKlIvriMEWJ8yW8brB7-2t1o1xabKewgHN6hN10ew_un8wzdX6-2Vzfl7fr7j6vL29LkGKnsmobWmjRGMuAcC76kDeF1R4E3mhFaixZqtpS007KRrLsQeSCMJIJL4KRhZ-j86LsP_tcEManRRgPDoB34KSrCiZCYUrnMKD2iJvgYA3RqH-yow0ERrOZaVK_mWtRci8JC5Vqy6OOT_9SM0P6TPPeQgS9HAHLKRwtBRWPBGWhtAJNU6-3L_l__k5vBOmv08BMOEHs_hfzJOYeKVGG1mRdj3gvCMJZyecH-AADYtRU</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1415602267</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement to Assess Reporting of Observational Trials in Hand Surgery</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Sorensen, Amelia A., MD ; Wojahn, Robert D., BS ; Manske, Mary Claire, MD ; Calfee, Ryan P., MD, MSc</creator><creatorcontrib>Sorensen, Amelia A., MD ; Wojahn, Robert D., BS ; Manske, Mary Claire, MD ; Calfee, Ryan P., MD, MSc</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose To use the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement checklist to critically evaluate the change in quality of observational trial reporting in the Journal of Hand Surgery American between 2005 and 2011. Methods A cross-sectional analysis of observational studies published in the Journal of Hand Surgery American was designed to sample 2 6-month periods of publication (March 2005 to August 2005 and June 2011 to November 2011). Fifty-one items were extracted from the STROBE statement for evaluation. Overall STROBE compliance rates for articles and specific checklist items were determined. Final compliance percentages from each period were compared by Student t -testing. Changes in item compliance over time were quantified. Results Overall compliance with the STROBE statement was 38% (range, 10%–54%) in 2005 and 58% (range, 39%–85%) for 2011 manuscripts representing a significant improvement. Seventy-five percent or greater of articles (2005/2011) provided the explicit reporting of background (100%/97%), follow-up time (85%/94%), overall interpretation of data (100%/94%), and results of similar studies (95%/89%). Twenty-five percent or less of articles provided the study design in the abstract (10%/20%), a clear description of the study's setting (10%/23%), the handling of missing data (0%/6%), the potential directions of bias (5%/11%), and the use of a power analysis (0%/17%). Eighty-six percent (44/51) of items were more frequently satisfied in 2011 articles than in 2005 publications. Absolute increases in compliance rates of 40% or greater were noted in 10 items (20%) with no worsening in compliance for an individual item over 6%. Conclusions The overall quality of the reporting of observational trials in the Journal of Hand Surgery American improved from 2005 to 2011. Current observational trials in hand surgery could still benefit from increased reporting of methodological details including the use of power analyses, the handling of missing data, and consideration of potential bias. Level of evidence Diagnostic III.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0363-5023</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1531-6564</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2013.05.008</identifier><identifier>PMID: 23845586</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>cohort studies ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Epidemiologic Research Design ; Guidelines as Topic ; Hand - surgery ; Humans ; Observation - methods ; observational studies ; Observational Studies as Topic - methods ; Orthopedics ; Publishing - standards ; Quality Control ; reporting ; STROBE ; United States</subject><ispartof>The Journal of hand surgery (American ed.), 2013-08, Vol.38 (8), p.1584-1589.e2</ispartof><rights>American Society for Surgery of the Hand</rights><rights>2013 American Society for Surgery of the Hand</rights><rights>Copyright © 2013 American Society for Surgery of the Hand. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c455t-fbb28a1bc63e4405472b148f2e4ba31285de83762fa6b63f955de5c61546e41b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c455t-fbb28a1bc63e4405472b148f2e4ba31285de83762fa6b63f955de5c61546e41b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2013.05.008$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,3551,27928,27929,45999</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23845586$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sorensen, Amelia A., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wojahn, Robert D., BS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Manske, Mary Claire, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Calfee, Ryan P., MD, MSc</creatorcontrib><title>Using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement to Assess Reporting of Observational Trials in Hand Surgery</title><title>The Journal of hand surgery (American ed.)</title><addtitle>J Hand Surg Am</addtitle><description>Purpose To use the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement checklist to critically evaluate the change in quality of observational trial reporting in the Journal of Hand Surgery American between 2005 and 2011. Methods A cross-sectional analysis of observational studies published in the Journal of Hand Surgery American was designed to sample 2 6-month periods of publication (March 2005 to August 2005 and June 2011 to November 2011). Fifty-one items were extracted from the STROBE statement for evaluation. Overall STROBE compliance rates for articles and specific checklist items were determined. Final compliance percentages from each period were compared by Student t -testing. Changes in item compliance over time were quantified. Results Overall compliance with the STROBE statement was 38% (range, 10%–54%) in 2005 and 58% (range, 39%–85%) for 2011 manuscripts representing a significant improvement. Seventy-five percent or greater of articles (2005/2011) provided the explicit reporting of background (100%/97%), follow-up time (85%/94%), overall interpretation of data (100%/94%), and results of similar studies (95%/89%). Twenty-five percent or less of articles provided the study design in the abstract (10%/20%), a clear description of the study's setting (10%/23%), the handling of missing data (0%/6%), the potential directions of bias (5%/11%), and the use of a power analysis (0%/17%). Eighty-six percent (44/51) of items were more frequently satisfied in 2011 articles than in 2005 publications. Absolute increases in compliance rates of 40% or greater were noted in 10 items (20%) with no worsening in compliance for an individual item over 6%. Conclusions The overall quality of the reporting of observational trials in the Journal of Hand Surgery American improved from 2005 to 2011. Current observational trials in hand surgery could still benefit from increased reporting of methodological details including the use of power analyses, the handling of missing data, and consideration of potential bias. Level of evidence Diagnostic III.</description><subject>cohort studies</subject><subject>Cross-Sectional Studies</subject><subject>Epidemiologic Research Design</subject><subject>Guidelines as Topic</subject><subject>Hand - surgery</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Observation - methods</subject><subject>observational studies</subject><subject>Observational Studies as Topic - methods</subject><subject>Orthopedics</subject><subject>Publishing - standards</subject><subject>Quality Control</subject><subject>reporting</subject><subject>STROBE</subject><subject>United States</subject><issn>0363-5023</issn><issn>1531-6564</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9ks1u1DAUhS0EotPCC7BAWZZFgv8nlRBSqaYUqdJInenacpybqUNiD7ZTaR6Gd8VhWhYsurJ99Z0jHZ-L0AeCK4KJ_NxX_UPUFcWEVVhUGNev0IIIRkopJH-NFphJVgpM2Qk6jbHHOKuYeItOKKu5ELVcoN_30bpdkR6g2KQAbpdv7nlyB3sf0vzyXbFuIoRHnax3esjw1FqIhXXFam9bGK0f_O5QnG-2d-tvq08Z0AlGcKlIvriMEWJ8yW8brB7-2t1o1xabKewgHN6hN10ew_un8wzdX6-2Vzfl7fr7j6vL29LkGKnsmobWmjRGMuAcC76kDeF1R4E3mhFaixZqtpS007KRrLsQeSCMJIJL4KRhZ-j86LsP_tcEManRRgPDoB34KSrCiZCYUrnMKD2iJvgYA3RqH-yow0ERrOZaVK_mWtRci8JC5Vqy6OOT_9SM0P6TPPeQgS9HAHLKRwtBRWPBGWhtAJNU6-3L_l__k5vBOmv08BMOEHs_hfzJOYeKVGG1mRdj3gvCMJZyecH-AADYtRU</recordid><startdate>20130801</startdate><enddate>20130801</enddate><creator>Sorensen, Amelia A., MD</creator><creator>Wojahn, Robert D., BS</creator><creator>Manske, Mary Claire, MD</creator><creator>Calfee, Ryan P., MD, MSc</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20130801</creationdate><title>Using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement to Assess Reporting of Observational Trials in Hand Surgery</title><author>Sorensen, Amelia A., MD ; Wojahn, Robert D., BS ; Manske, Mary Claire, MD ; Calfee, Ryan P., MD, MSc</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c455t-fbb28a1bc63e4405472b148f2e4ba31285de83762fa6b63f955de5c61546e41b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>cohort studies</topic><topic>Cross-Sectional Studies</topic><topic>Epidemiologic Research Design</topic><topic>Guidelines as Topic</topic><topic>Hand - surgery</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Observation - methods</topic><topic>observational studies</topic><topic>Observational Studies as Topic - methods</topic><topic>Orthopedics</topic><topic>Publishing - standards</topic><topic>Quality Control</topic><topic>reporting</topic><topic>STROBE</topic><topic>United States</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sorensen, Amelia A., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wojahn, Robert D., BS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Manske, Mary Claire, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Calfee, Ryan P., MD, MSc</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Journal of hand surgery (American ed.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sorensen, Amelia A., MD</au><au>Wojahn, Robert D., BS</au><au>Manske, Mary Claire, MD</au><au>Calfee, Ryan P., MD, MSc</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement to Assess Reporting of Observational Trials in Hand Surgery</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of hand surgery (American ed.)</jtitle><addtitle>J Hand Surg Am</addtitle><date>2013-08-01</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>38</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>1584</spage><epage>1589.e2</epage><pages>1584-1589.e2</pages><issn>0363-5023</issn><eissn>1531-6564</eissn><abstract>Purpose To use the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement checklist to critically evaluate the change in quality of observational trial reporting in the Journal of Hand Surgery American between 2005 and 2011. Methods A cross-sectional analysis of observational studies published in the Journal of Hand Surgery American was designed to sample 2 6-month periods of publication (March 2005 to August 2005 and June 2011 to November 2011). Fifty-one items were extracted from the STROBE statement for evaluation. Overall STROBE compliance rates for articles and specific checklist items were determined. Final compliance percentages from each period were compared by Student t -testing. Changes in item compliance over time were quantified. Results Overall compliance with the STROBE statement was 38% (range, 10%–54%) in 2005 and 58% (range, 39%–85%) for 2011 manuscripts representing a significant improvement. Seventy-five percent or greater of articles (2005/2011) provided the explicit reporting of background (100%/97%), follow-up time (85%/94%), overall interpretation of data (100%/94%), and results of similar studies (95%/89%). Twenty-five percent or less of articles provided the study design in the abstract (10%/20%), a clear description of the study's setting (10%/23%), the handling of missing data (0%/6%), the potential directions of bias (5%/11%), and the use of a power analysis (0%/17%). Eighty-six percent (44/51) of items were more frequently satisfied in 2011 articles than in 2005 publications. Absolute increases in compliance rates of 40% or greater were noted in 10 items (20%) with no worsening in compliance for an individual item over 6%. Conclusions The overall quality of the reporting of observational trials in the Journal of Hand Surgery American improved from 2005 to 2011. Current observational trials in hand surgery could still benefit from increased reporting of methodological details including the use of power analyses, the handling of missing data, and consideration of potential bias. Level of evidence Diagnostic III.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>23845586</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jhsa.2013.05.008</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0363-5023
ispartof The Journal of hand surgery (American ed.), 2013-08, Vol.38 (8), p.1584-1589.e2
issn 0363-5023
1531-6564
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1415602267
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete
subjects cohort studies
Cross-Sectional Studies
Epidemiologic Research Design
Guidelines as Topic
Hand - surgery
Humans
Observation - methods
observational studies
Observational Studies as Topic - methods
Orthopedics
Publishing - standards
Quality Control
reporting
STROBE
United States
title Using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement to Assess Reporting of Observational Trials in Hand Surgery
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-17T03%3A47%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Using%20the%20Strengthening%20the%20Reporting%20of%20Observational%20Studies%20in%20Epidemiology%20(STROBE)%20Statement%20to%20Assess%20Reporting%20of%20Observational%20Trials%20in%20Hand%20Surgery&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20hand%20surgery%20(American%20ed.)&rft.au=Sorensen,%20Amelia%20A.,%20MD&rft.date=2013-08-01&rft.volume=38&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=1584&rft.epage=1589.e2&rft.pages=1584-1589.e2&rft.issn=0363-5023&rft.eissn=1531-6564&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jhsa.2013.05.008&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1415602267%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1415602267&rft_id=info:pmid/23845586&rft_els_id=S0363502313006679&rfr_iscdi=true