A Survey of the Prevalence and Impact of Reporting Guideline Endorsement in Pathology Journals.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the prevalence of reporting guideline endorsement in pathology journals and to estimate the impact of guideline endorsement.

METHODS

We compared the quality of reporting in two sets of studies: (1) studies published in journals that explicitly mentioned a guideline vs studies published in journals that did not and (2) studies that cited a guideline vs studies that did not. The quality of reporting in prognostic biomarker studies was assessed using the REporting recommendations for tumor MARKer prognostic studies (REMARK) guideline.

RESULTS

We found that six (10%) of the 59 leading pathology journals explicitly mention reporting guidelines in the instructions to authors. Only one journal required authors to submit a checklist. There was significant variation in the rate at which various REMARK items were reported (P < .001). Journal endorsement was associated with more complete reporting (P = .04). Studies that cited REMARK had greater adherence to the REMARK reporting guidelines than studies that did not (P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of guideline endorsement is relatively low in pathology journals, but guideline endorsement may improve the quality of reporting.