• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

不孕不育期刊的报告质量。

Quality of reporting in infertility journals.

作者信息

Glujovsky Demian, Boggino Carolina, Riestra Barbara, Coscia Andrea, Sueldo Carlos E, Ciapponi Agustín

机构信息

Cochrane South-American Branch, Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS), Buenos Aires, Argentina; Center for Studies in Genetics and Reproduction (CEGYR), Buenos Aires, Argentina.

Center for Studies in Genetics and Reproduction (CEGYR), Buenos Aires, Argentina.

出版信息

Fertil Steril. 2015 Jan;103(1):236-41. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.10.024. Epub 2014 Nov 20.

DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.10.024
PMID:25455871
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether fertility and top gynecology journals indexed in PubMed require the use of reporting guidelines and to identify the percentage of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in 2013 that were written following CONSORT guidelines in the top four fertility journals (by their highest impact factor).

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study evaluating instructions for authors and RCTs published in fertility journals.

SETTING

Academic institution.

PATIENT(S): None.

INTERVENTION(S): None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Proportion of instruction-for-authors documents that suggested or required the use of reporting guidelines, and proportion of RCTs published in 2013 that accomplished the CONSORT checklist.

RESULT(S): In 47% (16/34) of the journals one or more reporting guidelines were mentioned in the instructions for authors' documents. PRISMA and CONSORT were the most commonly mentioned reporting guidelines. None of the analyzed RCTs completed the 25 items of CONSORT guideline. Sequence generation or allocation concealment was not described in 69% of the studies. One-third of the journals did not publish a flowchart, 72% did not show relative and absolute size-effect measures, and 42% did not use measures of imprecision. In the summaries, 42% did not discuss the limitations of the study and 78% did not mention the generalizability of the results.

CONCLUSION(S): Less than half of the analyzed peer-reviewed journals request the authors to use reporting guidelines. Nevertheless, among the top fertility and gynecology journals, reporting guidelines are widely mentioned. Overall, accomplishment of CONSORT items was suboptimal. Editorial boards, reviewers, and authors should join efforts to improve the quality of reporting.

摘要

目的

评估被PubMed收录的生殖医学及顶级妇科期刊是否要求使用报告指南,并确定2013年发表在四大生殖医学期刊(按影响因子排名)上的随机对照试验(RCT)按照CONSORT指南撰写的比例。

设计

横断面研究,评估生殖医学期刊中作者须知及发表的RCT。

地点

学术机构。

患者

无。

干预措施

无。

主要观察指标

作者须知文件中建议或要求使用报告指南的比例,以及2013年发表的RCT完成CONSORT清单的比例。

结果

47%(16/34)的期刊在作者须知文件中提及了一项或多项报告指南。PRISMA和CONSORT是最常被提及的报告指南。所分析的RCT均未完成CONSORT指南的25项内容。69%的研究未描述随机序列产生或分配隐藏情况。三分之一的期刊未发表流程图,72%未显示相对和绝对效应量测量,42%未使用不精确性测量。在研究总结中,42%未讨论研究的局限性,78%未提及结果的可推广性。

结论

不到一半的经分析的同行评审期刊要求作者使用报告指南。然而,在顶级生殖医学和妇科期刊中,报告指南被广泛提及。总体而言,CONSORT项目的完成情况欠佳。编辑委员会、审稿人和作者应共同努力提高报告质量。

相似文献

1
Quality of reporting in infertility journals.不孕不育期刊的报告质量。
Fertil Steril. 2015 Jan;103(1):236-41. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.10.024. Epub 2014 Nov 20.
2
Endorsement for improving the quality of reports on randomized controlled trials of traditional medicine journals in Korea: a systematic review.提高韩国传统医学期刊随机对照试验报告质量的认可:一项系统评价
Trials. 2014 Nov 5;15:429. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-429.
3
Quality of reports on randomized controlled trials published in Iranian journals: application of the new version of consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT).伊朗期刊发表的随机对照试验报告质量:新版本临床试验报告统一标准(CONSORT)的应用。
Arch Iran Med. 2013 Jan;16(1):20-2.
4
Reporting quality of randomized controlled trial abstracts in the seven highest-ranking anesthesiology journals.七本排名最高的麻醉学杂志中随机对照试验摘要的报告质量
Trials. 2018 Oct 29;19(1):591. doi: 10.1186/s13063-018-2976-x.
5
Has the quality of abstracts for randomised controlled trials improved since the release of Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trial guideline for abstract reporting? A survey of four high-profile anaesthesia journals.随机对照试验摘要的质量自 CONSORT 报告规范发布后是否有所提高?对四本知名麻醉学期刊的调查。
Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2011 Jul;28(7):485-92. doi: 10.1097/EJA.0b013e32833fb96f.
6
Editorial policy and the reporting of randomized controlled trials: a survey of instructions for authors and assessment of trial reports in Indian medical journals (2004-05).编辑政策与随机对照试验报告:对印度医学期刊作者指南的调查及试验报告评估(2004 - 2005年)
Natl Med J India. 2008 Mar-Apr;21(2):62-8.
7
Assessing the Quality of Abstracts in Randomized Controlled Trials Published in High Impact Cardiovascular Journals.评估发表于高影响力心血管期刊的随机对照试验摘要的质量。
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2019 May;12(5):e005260. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.118.005260.
8
Quality of reporting of test accuracy studies in reproductive medicine: impact of the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) initiative.生殖医学中检验准确性研究的报告质量:诊断准确性报告标准(STARD)倡议的影响
Fertil Steril. 2006 Nov;86(5):1321-9. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.03.050. Epub 2006 Sep 14.
9
An Evaluation of Reporting Guidelines and Clinical Trial Registry Requirements Among Plastic Surgery Journals.整形外科期刊中报告指南与临床试验注册要求的评估
Ann Plast Surg. 2018 Aug;81(2):215-219. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000001476.
10
Chinese authors do need CONSORT: reporting quality assessment for five leading Chinese medical journals.中国作者确实需要CONSORT:对五家中国顶级医学期刊的报告质量评估
Contemp Clin Trials. 2008 Sep;29(5):727-31. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2008.05.003. Epub 2008 May 18.

引用本文的文献

1
Systematic review and meta-analyses of studies analysing instructions to authors from 1987 to 2017.对1987年至2017年期间分析作者指南的研究进行系统评价和荟萃分析。
Nat Commun. 2021 Oct 5;12(1):5840. doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-26027-y.
2
Rigor, reproducibility, and transparency of randomized controlled trials in obstetrics and gynecology.妇产科随机对照试验的严谨性、可重复性和透明度。
Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2021 Nov;3(6):100450. doi: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2021.100450. Epub 2021 Jul 26.
3
Review process of the health scientific journals according to explanation of experts.
根据专家解释的健康科学期刊评审流程。
J Educ Health Promot. 2019 Sep 30;8:187. doi: 10.4103/jehp.jehp_162_19. eCollection 2019.
4
Trends and predictors of biomedical research quality, 1990-2015: a meta-research study.1990-2015 年生物医学研究质量的趋势和预测因素:一项元研究。
BMJ Open. 2019 Sep 3;9(9):e030342. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030342.
5
Evaluations of the uptake and impact of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement and extensions: a scoping review.评价系统评价和荟萃分析首选报告项目(PRISMA)声明及其扩展的采用和影响:范围综述。
Syst Rev. 2017 Dec 19;6(1):263. doi: 10.1186/s13643-017-0663-8.