Suppr超能文献

肾脏病学杂志中调查报道的质量:方法学综述。

Quality of survey reporting in nephrology journals: a methodologic review.

作者信息

Li Alvin Ho-Ting, Thomas Sonia M, Farag Alexandra, Duffett Mark, Garg Amit X, Naylor Kyla L

机构信息

Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, and Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada;

Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, and.

出版信息

Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2014 Dec 5;9(12):2089-94. doi: 10.2215/CJN.02130214. Epub 2014 Sep 29.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Survey research is an important research method used to determine individuals' attitudes, knowledge, and behaviors; however, as with other research methods, inadequate reporting threatens the validity of results. This study aimed to describe the quality of reporting of surveys published between 2001 and 2011 in the field of nephrology.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: The top nephrology journals were systematically reviewed (2001-2011: American Journal of Kidney Diseases, Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, and Kidney International; 2006-2011: Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology) for studies whose primary objective was to collect and report survey results. Included were nephrology journals with a heavy focus on clinical research and high impact factors. All titles and abstracts were screened in duplicate. Surveys were excluded if they were part of a multimethod study, evaluated only psychometric characteristics, or used semi-structured interviews. Information was collected on survey and respondent characteristics, questionnaire development (e.g., pilot testing), psychometric characteristics (e.g., validity and reliability), survey methods used to optimize response rate (e.g., system of multiple contacts), and response rate.

RESULTS

After a screening of 19,970 citations, 216 full-text articles were reviewed and 102 surveys were included. Approximately 85% of studies reported a response rate. Almost half of studies (46%) discussed how they developed their questionnaire and only a quarter of studies (28%) mentioned the validity or reliability of the questionnaire. The only characteristic that improved over the years was the proportion of articles reporting missing data (2001-2004: 46.4%; 2005-2008: 61.9%; and 2009-2011: 84.8%; respectively) (P<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of survey reporting in nephrology journals remains suboptimal. In particular, reporting of the validity and reliability of the questionnaire must be improved. Guidelines to improve survey reporting and increase transparency are clearly needed.

摘要

背景与目的

调查研究是用于确定个体态度、知识和行为的重要研究方法;然而,与其他研究方法一样,报告不充分会威胁结果的有效性。本研究旨在描述2001年至2011年发表在肾脏病学领域的调查研究的报告质量。

设计、背景、参与者及测量方法:对顶级肾脏病学杂志进行系统回顾(2001 - 2011年:《美国肾脏病杂志》《肾脏病透析移植杂志》和《国际肾脏病杂志》;2006 - 2011年:《美国肾脏病学会临床杂志》),选取主要目的是收集和报告调查结果的研究。纳入的是高度关注临床研究且影响因子较高的肾脏病学杂志。所有标题和摘要均进行双人筛选。如果调查是多方法研究的一部分、仅评估心理测量特征或使用半结构化访谈,则将其排除。收集有关调查和受访者特征、问卷编制(如预试验)、心理测量特征(如效度和信度)、用于优化回复率的调查方法(如多次联系系统)以及回复率的信息。

结果

在筛选了19970条引文后,对216篇全文文章进行了审查,纳入了102项调查。约85%的研究报告了回复率。近一半的研究(46%)讨论了问卷的编制方式,只有四分之一的研究(28%)提及了问卷的效度或信度。多年来唯一有所改善的特征是报告缺失数据的文章比例(2001 - 2004年:46.4%;2005 - 2008年:61.9%;2009 - 2011年:84.8%;P<0.01)。

结论

肾脏病学杂志中调查研究报告的质量仍不理想。特别是,问卷效度和信度的报告必须改进。显然需要提高调查研究报告质量和增加透明度的指南。

相似文献

1
Quality of survey reporting in nephrology journals: a methodologic review.肾脏病学杂志中调查报道的质量:方法学综述。
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2014 Dec 5;9(12):2089-94. doi: 10.2215/CJN.02130214. Epub 2014 Sep 29.
5
Inconsistent survey reporting in anesthesia journals.麻醉学期刊中调查报道的不一致性。
Anesth Analg. 2011 Sep;113(3):591-5. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e3182264aaf. Epub 2011 Jul 21.
6
Quantity and Reporting Quality of Kidney Research.肾脏研究的数量和报告质量。
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2019 Jan;30(1):13-22. doi: 10.1681/ASN.2018050515. Epub 2018 Dec 13.

引用本文的文献

5
Quality of survey-based study reports in dentistry.基于调查的牙科研究报告的质量。
BMC Oral Health. 2023 May 23;23(1):320. doi: 10.1186/s12903-023-02979-z.
7
A Consensus-Based Checklist for Reporting of Survey Studies (CROSS).基于共识的调查研究报告清单(CROSS)
J Gen Intern Med. 2021 Oct;36(10):3179-3187. doi: 10.1007/s11606-021-06737-1. Epub 2021 Apr 22.

本文引用的文献

1
Response rates and nonresponse errors in surveys.调查中的回应率和无回应误差。
JAMA. 2012 May 2;307(17):1805-6. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.3532.
4
Inconsistent survey reporting in anesthesia journals.麻醉学期刊中调查报道的不一致性。
Anesth Analg. 2011 Sep;113(3):591-5. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e3182264aaf. Epub 2011 Jul 21.
5
Guidance for developers of health research reporting guidelines.健康研究报告规范开发者指南。
PLoS Med. 2010 Feb 16;7(2):e1000217. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000217.
6
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.系统评价与Meta分析的首选报告项目:PRISMA声明。
Ann Intern Med. 2009 Aug 18;151(4):264-9, W64. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135. Epub 2009 Jul 20.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验