Scoping review on interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines in health research

Objectives The goal of this study is to identify, analyse and classify interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines in order to obtain a wide picture of how the problem of enhancing the completeness of reporting of biomedical literature has been tackled so far. Design Scoping review. Search strategy We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases and conducted a grey literature search for (1) studies evaluating interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines in health research and (2) other types of references describing interventions that have been performed or suggested but never evaluated. The characteristics and effect of the evaluated interventions were analysed. Moreover, we explored the rationale of the interventions identified and determined the existing gaps in research on the evaluation of interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines. Results 109 references containing 31 interventions (11 evaluated) were included. These were grouped into five categories: (1) training on the use of reporting guidelines, (2) improving understanding, (3) encouraging adherence, (4) checking adherence and providing feedback, and (5) involvement of experts. Additionally, we identified lack of evaluated interventions (1) on training on the use of reporting guidelines and improving their understanding, (2) at early stages of research and (3) after the final acceptance of the manuscript. Conclusions This scoping review identified a wide range of strategies to improve adherence to reporting guidelines that can be taken by different stakeholders. Additional research is needed to assess the effectiveness of many of these interventionsPeer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft

Suicide contagion : is the media placing the public at risk? An analysis of suicide reporting in New Zealand : a thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Clinical Psychology at Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand

The media’s reporting of suicide has been shown to increase subsequent community suicide rates through a process called suicide contagion. It is not necessarily the reporting of suicide that causes suicide contagion, but rather it is the manner in which it is reported. As a result, within New Zealand a number of legislative (the Coroners Act, 2006) and industry guidelines (Reporting Suicide: A resource for the media, 2011) have been introduced to decrease any risk of suicide contagion. The aim of the present study was to investigate how suicide is portrayed in newspapers, examine whether suicide reporting has changed between two timeframes, and explore journalists’ beliefs and behaviour about suicide reporting. The present thesis is divided into two parts. Study One uses quantitative and qualitative methods to compare and contrast all suicide newspaper articles from leading New Zealand newspapers from 12 month periods in 1997 (pre-suicide guidelines) and 2009 (post-suicide guidelines). The results revealed that reporting quality had improved where there was a decrease in the occurrence of elements known to contribute to suicide contagion. However, despite reporting quality improving the study identified that articles continued to include a number of areas where suicide reporting could be improved upon. Study Two complemented Study One by interviewing journalists about their knowledge of contagion, reporting practices and barriers and difficulties in suicide reporting. The rhetorical analysis demonstrated that participants argued that evidence for suicide contagion was inconclusive and problematic. This had important implications as the media argued their reporting was to a high standard and consequently did not view reporting guidelines or the Coroners Act as necessary. As a result, participants largely avoided these restrictions and viewed them as a threat to media freedom. Together these studies demonstrated that suicide reporting quality can still be improved, however, in order to improve writing styles, implementing suicide guidelines does not appear enough. Instead, this study demonstrates that it is necessary to increase media awareness of suicide contagion, so the media understand the importance of applying reporting guidelines

Quality of Reporting and Adherence to ARRIVE Guidelines in Animal Studies for Chagas Disease Preclinical Drug Research: A Systematic Review

Publication of accurate and detailed descriptions of methods in research articles involving animals is essential for health scientists to accurately interpret published data, evaluate results and replicate findings. Inadequate reporting of key aspects of experimental design may reduce the impact of studies and could act as a barrier to translation of research findings. Reporting of animal use must be as comprehensive as possible in order to take advantage of every study and every animal used. Animal models are essential to understanding and assessing new chemotherapy candidates for Chagas disease pathology, a widespread parasitic disease with few treatment options currently available. A systematic review was carried out to compare ARRIVE guidelines recommendations with information provided in publications of preclinical studies for new anti-Trypanosoma cruzi compounds. A total of 83 publications were reviewed. Before ARRIVE guidelines, 69% of publications failed to report any macroenvironment information, compared to 57% after ARRIVE publication. Similar proportions were observed when evaluating reporting of microenvironmental information (56% vs. 61%). Also, before ARRIVE guidelines publication, only 13% of papers described animal gender, only 18% specified microbiological status and 13% reported randomized treatment assignment, among other essential information missing or incomplete. Unfortunately, publication of ARRIVE guidelines did not seem to enhance reporting quality, compared to papers appeared before ARRIVE publication. Our results suggest that there is a strong need for the scientific community to improve animal use description, animal models employed, transparent reporting and experiment design to facilitate its transfer and application to the affected human population. Full compliance with ARRIVE guidelines, or similar animal research reporting guidelines, would be an excellent start in this direction.Fil: Gulin, Julián Ernesto Nicolás. Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Hospital General de Niños ; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Rocco, Daniela Marisa. Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Hospital General de Niños ; Argentina. Ministerio de Ciencia. Tecnología e Innovación Productiva. Agencia Nacional de Promoción Cientifíca y Tecnológica; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: García Bournissen, Facundo. Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Hospital General de Niños ; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentin

Guidelines for analysis and reporting of clinical trials in oncology.

When analyzing and reporting the results of clinical trials, investigators should follow a simple approach. The purpose of a trial is to estimate an effect or treatment difference, which if present would have clinical utility when treating new patients. Procedures or methods that do not facilitate precisely and impartially estimating and reporting the treatment effect are likely to mislead investigators. Most often in clinical trials, investigators are interested in estimates of risk ratios (specifically odds or hazard ratios) between the treatment groups or levels of a prognostic factor. These simple ideas suggest that the most useful results from clinical trials will be estimated risk ratios and their confidence limits. Especially in cancer, where disease progression, recurrence, and death are common events following treatment, estimates of risk difference are very relevant. Hypothesis tests and associated P-values, although often (or exclusively) reported, are of lesser utility because they do not fully summarize the data. These recommendations may be seen by some investigators to be contrary to accepted practice. It is true that they are somewhat contrary to common practice but their general acceptance is evident in many journals and presentations by clinical trial methodologists. Despite some disagreement among statisticians regarding the need for adjustment of analyses for imbalanced prognostic factors, it is helpful to see if treatment effects change after accounting for imbalances. When this occurs, it may be of clinical interest. Although we discourage analyses that exclude any patients who meet the eligibility criteria, some circumstances will require that this be done (e.g., when a patient refuses to participate after randomization). Investigators should report, and emphasize as primary, those analyses that include all eligible patients. It is our hope and belief that analysis and reporting of trial results along the guidelines suggested here will result in impartial and useful information for journal readers

The RECORD reporting guidelines: meeting the methodological and ethical demands of transparency in research using routinely-collected health data

Routinely-collected health data (RCD) are now used for a wide range of studies, including observational studies, comparative effectiveness research, diagnostics, studies of adverse effects, and predictive analytics. At the same time, limitations inherent in using data collected without specific a priori research questions are increasingly recognized. There is also a growing awareness of the suboptimal quality of reports presenting research based on RCD. This has created a perfect storm of increased interest and use of RCD for research, together with inadequate reporting of the strengths and weaknesses of these data resources. The REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected Data (RECORD) statement was developed to address these limitations and to help researchers using RCD to meet their ethical obligations of complete and accurate reporting, as well as improve the utility of research conducted using RCD. The RECORD statement has been endorsed by more than 15 journals, including Clinical Epidemiology. This journal now recommends that authors submit the RECORD checklist together with any manuscript reporting on research using RCD

Patient safety incident reporting in Indonesia: an analysis using World Health Organization characteristics for successful reporting

Background: Incident reporting is widely acknowledged as one of the ways of improving patient safety and has been implemented in Indonesia for more than ten years. However, there was no significant increase in the number of reported incidents nationally. The study described in this paper aimed at assessing the extent to which Indonesia’s patient safety incident reporting system has adhered to the World Health Organization (WHO) characteristics for successful reporting.Methods: We interviewed officials from 16 organizations at national, provincial and district or city levels in Indonesia. We reviewed several policies, guidelines and regulations pertinent to incident reporting in Indonesia and examined whether the WHO characteristics were covered in these documents. We used NVivo version 9 to manage the interview data and applied thematic analysis to organize our findings. Results: Our study found that there was an increased need for a non-punitive system, confidentiality, expert-analysis, and timeliness of reporting, system-orientation, and responsiveness. The existing guidelines, policies and regulations in Indonesia, to a large extent, have not satisfied all the required WHO characteristics of incident reporting. Furthermore, awareness and understanding of the reporting system amongst officials at almost all levels were lacking. Conclusion: Despite being implemented for more than a decade, Indonesia’s patient safety incident reporting system has not fully adhered to the WHO guidelines. There is a pressing need for the Indonesian Government to improve the system, by putting specific regulations and by creating a robust infrastructure at all levels to support the incident reporting

Two Years Later: Journals Are Not Yet Enforcing the ARRIVE Guidelines on Reporting Standards for Pre-Clinical Animal Studies

There is growing concern that poor experimental design and lack of transparent reporting contribute to the frequent failure of pre-clinical animal studies to translate into treatments for human disease. In 2010, the Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) guidelines were introduced to help improve reporting standards. They were published in PLOS Biology and endorsed by funding agencies and publishers and their journals, including PLOS, Nature research journals, and other top-tier journals. Yet our analysis of papers published in PLOS and Nature journals indicates that there has been very little improvement in reporting standards since then. This suggests that authors, referees, and editors generally are ignoring guidelines, and the editorial endorsement is yet to be effectively implemented

On Integrating Student Empirical Software Engineering Studies with Research and Teaching Goals

Background: Many empirical software engineering studies use students as subjects and are conducted as part of university courses. Aim: We aim at reporting our experiences with using guidelines for integrating empirical studies with our research and teaching goals. Method: We document our experience from conducting three studies with graduate students in two software architecture courses. Results: Our results show some problems that we faced when following the guidelines and deviations we made from the original guidelines. Conclusions: Based on our results we propose recommendations for empirical software engineering studies that are integrated in university courses.